Crime President Biden declares Easter Sunday a Transgender Day of Visibility

[Fox by the Sea]

Because saying we shouldn't be giving hormone treatments to children or doing gender reassignment surgery on them isn't a right wing position. The fact that you guys are insisting that it is, is alarming. This is exactly what I'm talking about.

it's only a right wing issue if open and militant pro-degeneracy is a left-wing issue.
i've voted left wing all my life, but i will NEVER vote for a party that encourages doing that to kids, or suicidal immigration.

 

[Mike]

it's only a right wing issue if open and militant pro-degeneracy is a left-wing issue.
i've voted left wing all my life, but i will NEVER vote for a party that encourages doing that to kids, or suicidal immigration.

That's where I'm at. I'm not a greater good guy. As in support this evil here for the greater good over there. NO. I will not support something I think is immoral. Full stop. And I'm not republican and REALLY don't want to vote republican. So I guess I just wont vote. Again. If they keep only giving me shitty choices I'm just going to keep not voting and I know I'm not the only one.

 

[Fox by the Sea]

That's where I'm at. I'm not a greater good guy. As in support this evil here for the greater good over there. NO. I will not support something I think is immoral. Full stop. And I'm not republican and REALLY don't want to vote republican. So I guess I just wont vote. Again. If they keep only giving me shitty choices I'm just going to keep not voting and I know I'm not the only one.

this "accept degeneracy or you're a nazi!" gaslighting is so transparent, and they think they're clever when they do it. everybody sees through it though.

 

[Mike]

this "accept degeneracy or you're a nazi!" gaslighting is so transparent, and they think they're clever when they do it. everybody sees through it though.

I'm glad other people see it because I feel like I'm taking crazy pills on this forum sometimes. They're desperately trying to package this as an all or nothing deal. "Look you have to accept the trannies or else the republicans win! Oh no!"

Oh well fuck it let them win then. Maybe the entire party shouldn't have hitched their wagon to mentally ill people on a crusade.

 

[Fox by the Sea]

I'm glad other people see it because I feel like I'm taking crazy pills on this forum sometimes. They're desperately trying to package this as an all or nothing deal. "look you have to accept the trannies or else the republicans win! Oh no!"

Oh well fuck it let them win then. Maybe the entire party shouldn't have hitched their wagon to mentally ill people on a crusade.

you're only seeing the loons projecting that message.
in the real world normal people aren't demented activists trying to gaslight.

 

[Andy Capp]

Why is that alarming? Again I am not necessarily saying that the right wing position is wrong here. On the far right they want transgenders in the closet and want no one to get access to gender reassignment surgery. I don't think you're arguing that though. Rather you're arguing the more moderate right wing critique which focuses on transitions for children and transwomen in certain women's spaces like women's sports.

Like I said I am inclined to agree with you on some of those things. I think with the very large uptick in children, usually girls, identifying as transgender who also have comorbidities like anxiety and depressive disorders and whose friend groups also identify that way its probably prudent to consider that the root cause is not gender dysphoria. In Europe we are seeing certain gender reassignment clinics reevaluate their approach in light of this. I think that's fair but I also think its fair to say that this is a right wing critique of a left wing policy preference. I don't know why you're so allergic to the label of "right wing", I'm using it purely as a descriptive term here.

I never said you can't be a Democrat though so not sure where you got that from. You can be right wing as a Democrat like Joe Manchin or you can be a center left Democrat which would put you to the right of Dems from more blue states like Cali and NY. Left-right is a spectrum and most of us will be to the left of some and to the right of others even within our own party and we will have various beliefs that might fall on different parts of the spectrum. Beyond that I'm trying to argue in good faith here and yet you're here calling me a zombie, kind of rude but alright.

As far as those points I've already said that I think there's reasonable disagreement to be had there and I tend to fall on the center right position there. I think transwomen in some women's spaces like a book club is fine but something like collegiate sports or a prison are matters where sex relative to gender becomes much more relevant and where it makes sense to draw harder lines. If we're talking about horrible ideas that are bad for the country though I see that much more from the right like the insistence on limiting immigration, cutting taxes, shrinking the welfare state. I think the proof is in the pudding, the US economy under Joe Biden is the strongest in the world while countries that have engaged in austerity like China and Europe have struggled. Those things matter much more to the future of the country than transgenders in high school sporting tournaments and hence my frustration with how much play these bad faith critiques of Biden get.

When infrastructure catches up, in school sports and washrooms and so on, right wingers will have a point. Mean time, where the fuck should these people go to participate in society the way everyone else takes for granted? How is dictating what washroom school children may use going to help?

If anything, this kind of controversy is needed to move such societal adaptation forward.

@Mike I owe you an apology for my reaction to your initial comment earlier. I have grown tired of repeating the same explanations for my positions on such topics over and over. I should not have taken that out on you. Aside from this topic I have no disagreement with you that I'm aware of.

My issues with your expressed position are as follows:

How do issues affecting trans people affect you personally?
Why do you think decisions about psychological and medical treatments for children are the responsibility of anyone but a child's doctor and the child's parents?
Why do you think the issues of participation in sports and gender affirming care can't be each dealt with as the individual concerns on their own and not as reflecting upon transgender people generally in a negative way?

Incidentally, I agree with you that politicization of this issue is gross and stupid; it casts a bad light on those responsible. The thing is, those responsible are right wing talking heads. It starts with conservative talk radio, expands into social media and the likes of Fox News, Daily Caller, NY Post, etc.

I think that's why you're being accused of repeating far right talking points. I understand if it seems quite unfair because you're taking in what information you have available and forming an opinion on your own, but I submit that some of what you come across is fearmongering propaganda--see the "transgender megathread", just enough to augment anecdotal cases into widespread crises.

In other words, I think the idea that so-called trans activism has gone too far is caused by a lot of exaggeration in media, especially social media, but also sites like the NY Post and Breitbart.

These people are a vanishingly small proportion of the total population. How do you explain their outsized coverage in the media if not because of the right wing propaganda machine?

 

[Andy Capp]

I'm glad other people see it because I feel like I'm taking crazy pills on this forum sometimes. They're desperately trying to package this as an all or nothing deal. "Look you have to accept the trannies or else the republicans win! Oh no!"

Oh well fuck it let them win then. Maybe the entire party shouldn't have hitched their wagon to mentally ill people on a crusade.

I had a feeling the conversation was headed in this direction hence my post. Please see above.

 

[Mike]

you're only seeing the loons projecting that message.
in the real world normal people aren't demented activists trying to gaslight.

And that's why I think they're in for a rude awakening. They are really out of touch with how blue collar liberals feel. Hint: they aren't into this shit at all.

 

[Andy Capp]

you're only seeing the loons projecting that message.
in the real world normal people aren't demented activists trying to gaslight.

In the real world normal people aren't invested in the medical care of other people's children.

 

[Fox by the Sea]

And that's why I think they're in for a rude awakening. They are really out of touch with how blue collar liberals feel. Hint: they aren't into this shit at all.

No sane person is.

 

[SKYNET]

I think the issue is that @Mike isn't willing to just have an honest discussion.

@Mike has become a rightist

The sad part is these weirdos wouldn't dare try this crap in person

 

[Islam Imamate]

This language pisses people off because it makes it seem like if you don't blindly support all of this you're not a liberal. There are LOTS of left leaning, very liberal people that don't support this. That doesn't make them right wing.

That's not what I said and I even explained at length why that's not the case. You can be a left leaning liberal and argue for certain right wing positions like how I argue for school choice and gun rights. And within any party there will be some folks who are relatively to the right and relatively to the left. Within the Democrat party you have people like Manchin who are at the right wing end of the party and people like AOC on the left wing of the party. There's plenty of space between them and its important to defend that space so that an electorally viable coalition can operate at the national level.

Definitely doesn't feel that way when posters like Jack come in and argue with nothing but ad hominem attacks and repeatedly misrepresenting my position, and you act like you mysteriously didn't see any of that and I'm just getting upset for no reason. Makes it feel like you're playing games.

I'm not going to answer for JVS, he can answer for himself. If you imply I'm a partisan zombie then yeah I'm not going to assume you're arguing in good faith, is that really unfair?

Ok here our positions are not far off, I wanted clarification of specifically what your stance is because people are often very vague on this topic.

I can't be that specific because that would apply to lots of areas and each would requires it own approach. With sports I'm more inclined to accept a blanket ban of transgenders but with prisons you have to weigh the fact that while a transwoman in a female prison might be a risk to the other prisoners if she is put in a male prison she is at serious risk herself.

Here we are venturing into whataboutism. The Republican part doing shitty things doesn't make it any better that the democrats are doing shitty things. And it ignores that MANY people have topics that are so personal they won't support a candidate that doesn't align with them. Wait and see, this stance WILL cost them voters. Both through people like me that just aren't going to vote, and people on the fence that will be pushed republican by this.

Its not really "whatboutism" because if we're talking about the wider political landscape then we should to take into account the wider party platforms. Like I said I agree with some of the right wing critiques in regards to certain transgender issues but overall I think the Democrats are far better at the national level.

And this dismissive tone is why you will lose voters. It's about MUCH more than men competing in female sports and I think you know that. They're attempting to rewrite the very concept of gender. Without any basis in science, any sort of data to prove they're correct and know wtf they're doing. Framing gender reassignment on children and the dissolution of private female spaces as a "small" issue is disingenuous to the point that to people like myself it sounds like you're trolling., This is a VERY serious matter. It's upsetting to people like myself that it's being framed like it isn't. This is absolutely enough of a reason to not support someone being the president of this country.

I have nothing to do with voter outreach, I'm a mod on a karate forum arguing politics with anonymous strangers. The fact that you're so quick to assume I'm trolling in an effort to dismiss my POV doesn't really come off as good faith. I don't doubt that people really care about this issue, I just think they're wrong to center it so much in light of everything else. But you doubt that I might feel the way I say I do for some reason, its just strange to me.

Some people care a lot about a single issue, that's your prerogative. For some its gun control, abortion, or Israel and clearly for an emerging subset of voters its transgenders. If you're one of those that's fine but can't you see how some folks like myself aren't single issue voters and look at the party platforms and their norms and tendencies as a whole? Is it really hard to believe that someone might genuinely feel the way I say I do?

this "accept degeneracy or you're a nazi!" gaslighting is so transparent, and they think they're clever when they do it. everybody sees through it though.

I'm glad other people see it because I feel like I'm taking crazy pills on this forum sometimes. They're desperately trying to package this as an all or nothing deal. "look you have to accept the trannies or else the republicans win! Oh no!"

Oh well fuck it let them win then. Maybe the entire party shouldn't have hitched their wagon to mentally ill people on a crusade.

Where did I accuse anyone of being a Nazi? Where did I even say that you have to accept "degeneracy" or even transgenders? Don't you see how I might feel you guys are a bit bad faith when I try to put some effort into my takes here only for it to get boiled down to these kinds of strawman arguments? Mike here is complaining about trolling on my part but I think your posts here come far closer to that than anything I've posted.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Quite the contrary, that is the right wing position on this issue.

It's not just the right-wing position on *that* issue. His own claim was that his agreement with the right on the issue makes him a rightist overall--that the issue is so important to him it defines his political identity. What I think a lot of people don't understand is that that's the modal rightist overall view. That is, most Republicans don't agree with the GOP's fanatical focus on tax cuts for the rich. They vote for them because they see them as the default party and they disagree with online leftists about social issues, and then imagine that that's really what politics is about.

I think JVS makes the mistake of labeling him a Republican because in truth many people from a certain generation don't identify with the GOP even if they are right leaning, they will be right leaning independents before identifying as Republican.

But Mike is arguing the right wing position ITT and for some reason is shy and embarrassed about that fact.

You say this as if its an insult and I think that's the issue here. If you argue the right wing position, which on this issue you are, then people will perceive you as on the right at least in regards to this issue. Why is that weird?

More than that, if you call yourself a rightist and say that that's because the left only cares about some issue that most of the left doesn't actually care about, people will think you're a rightist.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Because saying we shouldn't be giving hormone treatments to children or doing gender reassignment surgery on them isn't a right wing position. The fact that you guys are insisting that it is, is alarming. This is exactly what I'm talking about.

But you're just outright lying about this. That's what *I'm* talking about.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Definitely doesn't feel that way when posters like Jack come in and argue with nothing but ad hominem attacks and repeatedly misrepresenting my position, and you act like you mysteriously didn't see any of that and I'm just getting upset for no reason. Makes it feel like you're playing games.

No one saw it because you're making it up. I represented your position accurately, and your response was personal attacks, running, and then kind of talking behind my back like a little girl.

 

[Mike]

When infrastructure catches up, in school sports and washrooms and so on, right wingers will have a point. Mean time, where the fuck should these people go to participate in society the way everyone else takes for granted? How is dictating what washroom school children may use going to help?

If anything, this kind of controversy is needed to move such societal adaptation forward.

@Mike I owe you an apology for my reaction to your initial comment earlier. I have grown tired of repeating the same explanations for my positions on such topics over and over. I should not have taken that out on you. Aside from this topic I have no disagreement with you that I'm aware of.

My issues with your expressed position are as follows:

How do issues affecting trans people affect you personally?
Why do you think decisions about psychological and medical treatments for children are the responsibility of anyone but a child's doctor and the child's parents?
Why do you think the issues of participation in sports and gender affirming care can't be each dealt with as the individual concerns on their own and not as reflecting upon transgender people generally in a negative way?

Incidentally, I agree with you that politicization of this issue is gross and stupid; it casts a bad light on those responsible. The thing is, those responsible are right wing talking heads. It starts with conservative talk radio, expands into social media and the likes of Fox News, Daily Caller, NY Post, etc.

I think that's why you're being accused of repeating far right talking points. I understand if it seems quite unfair because you're taking in what information you have available and forming an opinion on your own, but I submit that some of what you come across is fearmongering propaganda--see the "transgender megathread", just enough to augment anecdotal cases into widespread crises.

In other words, I think the idea that so-called trans activism has gone too far is caused by a lot of exaggeration in media, especially social media, but also sites like the NY Post and Breitbart.

These people are a vanishingly small proportion of the total population. How do you explain their outsized coverage in the media if not because of the right wing propaganda machine?

How do issues affecting trans people affect you personally: They effect everyone because they are demanding and forcing the restructuring of both shared public spaces and private spaces. I don't agree with men competing against women or being allowed into private women's only spaces.

Why do you think decisions about psychological and medical treatments for children are the responsibility of anyone but a child's doctor and the child's parents: Because performing experimental procedures on children that can't consent is immoral and disgusting. These are growing children who's brains aren't developed. It's incredibly irresponsible to say hey well just load them up with hormones and mutilate their genitals and see if it works out. If not they're scarred for life and can't ever reverse it, so no biggie. How could anyone in their right mind NOT be opposed to it is my question. It's not like we spent a long time doing research and coming to a scientific consensus that this was a good thing to do BEFORE we started doing it. The "it's up to the parents" argument only works if we've already decided that what's going on here is ethical. WE intervene and tell people what they can and can't do with their own kids all the time when what they're doing is deemed abusive.

Why do you think the issues of participation in sports and gender affirming care can't be each dealt with as the individual concerns on their own and not as reflecting upon transgender people generally in a negative way: Because as a group they are arguing that men competing against women is just and fair, or allowing others to make that argument for them. When it very clearly is not.


These people are a vanishingly small proportion of the total population. How do you explain their outsized coverage in the media if not because of the right wing propaganda machine: The government and corporate america creating 5000 different celebration days and festivals and other things shoving this shit down people's throats. Also they have had a much larger presence on social media in recent years. Seen in many videos and clips screaming at people for not using the ""correct" pronouns and generally acting like psychos. They are their own worst pr and publicly portray themselves in the worst light possible very often. You are not the first person to point out the small number of transgenders, as if that in and of itself means they're only capable of causing a small amount of harm or aren't a big issue. I'd argue the complete opposite, the fact that they've had such a strong negative impact on society despite being a very small group is very alarming. and over a very short period of time.

 

[Mike]

That's not what I said and I even explained at length why that's not the case. You can be a left leaning liberal and argue for certain right wing positions like how I aruge for school choice and gun rights. And within any party there will be some folks who are relatively to the right and relatively to the left. Within the Democrat party you have people like Manchin who are at the right wing end of the party and people like AOC on the left wing of the party. There's plenty of space between them and its important to defend that space so that an electorally viable coalition can operate at the national level.

I'm not going to answer for JVS, he can answer for himself. If you imply I'm a partisan zombie then yeah I'm not going to assume you're arguing in good faith, is that really unfair?

I can't be that specific because that would apply to lots of areas and each would requires it own approach. With sports I'm more inclined to accept a blanket ban of transgenders but with prisons you have to weigh the fact that while a transwoman in a female prison might be a risk to the other prisoners if she is put in a male prison she is at serious risk herself.

Its not really "whatboutism" because if we're talking about the wider political landscape then we should to take into account the wider party platforms. Like I said I agree with some of the right wing critiques in regards to certain transgender issues but overall I think the Democrats are far better at the national level.

I have nothing to do with voter outreach, I'm a mod on a karate forum arguing politics with anonymous strangers. The fact that you're so quick to assume I'm trolling in an effort to dismiss my POV doesn't really come off as good faith. I don't doubt that people really care about this issue, I just think they're wrong to center it so much in light of everything else. But you doubt that I might feel the way I say I do for some reason, its just strange to me.

Some people care a lot about a single issue, that's your prerogative. For some its gun control, abortion, or Israel and clearly for an emerging subset of voters its transgenders. If you're one of those that's fine but can't you see how some folks like myself aren't single issue voters and look at the party platforms and their norms and tendencies as a whole? Is it really hard to believe that someone might genuinely feel the way I say I do?


Where did I accuse anyone of being a Nazi? Where did I even say that you have to accept "degeneracy" or even transgenders? Don't you see how I might feel you guys are a bit bad faith when I try to put some effort into my takes here only for it to get boiled down to these kinds of strawman arguments? Mike here is complaining about trolling on my part but I think your posts here come far closer to that than anything I've posted.

Yeah to try to be fair to you, it just rubs me the wrong way when a mod jumps in seemingly cheerleading a poster that was doing nothing but making personal attacks and misrepresenting statements. Then acts as if they didn't see any of that. You know I don't have any particular issue with you, but the what do you mean what trolling pissed me and others off lmao. It was very, very obvious trolling. Maybe I shouldn't have taken it out on you. The zombie thing seems to have really offended you so I'll take that back, that was kinda dickish.

 

[Sinister]

I used to believe the bolded for many years. I was a staunch defender of trans people on these very forums for years. Thanks to being left leaning and having actually known a number of trans people in my personal life.

Then came all the other stuff I mentioned earlier. Demanding that men compete in sports against women, be allowed to invade women's only spaces. Hormone treatments and surgeries being done on kids. Under the LIE that there is a scientific consensus that this is appropriate to do and not harmful in the long term, when that is not proven at all.


A complete cultural bombardment of trans acceptance messaging to the point that now when people like myself challenge the things I mentioned above, they are labeled as bigots or right wingers.

Look I get it, and I've been called every name in the book by right wingers and "enlightened centrists" here regarding some stances I've argued on this issue. I used to be a lot closer to the right position on trans issues, separate spheres ideology, etc. At the end of the day it really comes down to where different people draw the line, and having something in society that is against accepted tradition always gets messy this way. The guy I mentioned earlier who is anti-abortion speaks of abortion in the same way you mentioned trans issues in another post. He just cannot find it in himself to ally with something he considers immoral, he specifically called it a stain on our humanity. If I ever appeal to him on it again, which I'm sure I will at some point because he likes to talk to me about these things, we're just going to explore what informed that perspective for him. Why this particular ideology is so cemented.

We dont like kids getting hormone treatments, and yet kids can get hormone treatments for a plethora of medical issues, with parental consent of course. We like parental rights and the State not telling them how to parent, except in this case...where we want to tell parents they cannot treat their kids for a condition as opposed to other times the State intervenes if the parents dont treat their kids for conditions. We want separate spheres that protect gender norms under the guise of women's safety...and yet Historically separate spheres have been used to confine women to private/domestic spheres that kept them devoid of both political and economic power (something the right also espouse, as many more are suggesting women shouldnt even vote), and put them at much much higher risk of being abused (abolishment of no-fault divorce, no spousal rape laws, reproductive decisions requiring husband approval, all a result of this).

All these issues can muddy the water because its societies working out how to integrate a relatively new group of people who have always been present, but never put at the center of political strife in this way. I used to be very weirded out by the idea of trans kids and always felt parents should definitely "wait until later" and "let the kids be kids." My wife and I had home births, and she had a friend who lent us the birthing tub for it, and eventually gave it to us. They're a very "all natural" and even anti-vax Family, but they had a Son who was always, unusual. Not going to go I to details but at first I just thought they maybe coddled him too much. That kid is a lot older now, but is trans, and at first being bewildered by it, I thought about my gay Cousin. Anyone with half a brain knew what he was when he was little. He was just very different from the 4-5 boys he was always around. The world tried to interact with him all the ways it would a normal boy, and it just didn't work. He is what he is. I started to think maybe it's more complicated than my understanding. And being as I work with problem kids all the time, I realize that pointing a finger at them and demanding them to be as we want is quite often a losing strategy. What was that old David Bowie quote?

"And these children that you spit on
As they try to change their worlds
Are immune to your consultations.
They're quite aware of what they're going through."

 

[Mike]

In the real world normal people aren't invested in the medical care of other people's children.

Come on man, don't do this lol. Gender reassignment on children is not just typical medical care and you know this. Many feel it's mutilation done on people not mature enough to consent to it.

 

[Mike]

Look I get it, and I've been called every name in the book by right wingers and "enlightened centrists" here regarding some stances I've argued on this issue. I used to be a lot closer to the right position on trans issues, separate spheres ideology, etc. At the end of the day it really comes down to where different people draw the line, and having something in society that is against accepted tradition always gets messy this way. The guy I mentioned earlier who is anti-abortion speaks of abortion in the same way you mentioned trans issues in another post. He just cannot find it in himself to ally with something he considers immoral, he specifically called it a stain on our humanity. If I ever appeal to him on it again, which I'm sure I will at some point because he likes to talk to me about these things, we're just going to explore what informed that perspective for him. Why this particular ideology is so cemented.

We dont like kids getting hormone treatments, and yet kids can get hormone treatments for a plethora of medical issues, with parental consent of course. We like parental rights and the State not telling them how to parent, except in this case...where we want to tell parents they cannot treat their kids for a condition as opposed to other times the State intervenes if the parents dont treat their kids for conditions. We want separate spheres that protect gender norms under the guise of women's safety...and yet Historically separate spheres have been used to confine women to private/domestic spheres that kept them devoid of both political and economic power (something the right also espouse, as many more are suggesting women shouldnt even vote), and put them at much much higher risk of being abused (abolishment of no-fault divorce, no spousal rape laws, reproductive decisions requiring husband approval, all a result of this).

All these issues can muddy the water because its societies working out how to integrate a relatively new group of people who have always been present, but never put at the center of political strife in this way. I used to be very weirded out by the idea of trans kids and always felt parents should definitely "wait until later" and "let the kids be kids." My wife and I had home births, and she had a friend who lent us the birthing tub for it, and eventually gave it to us. They're a very "all natural" and even anti-vax Family, but they had a Son who was always, unusual. Not going to go I to details but at first I just thought they maybe coddled him too much. That kid is a lot older now, but is trans, and at first being bewildered by it, I thought about my gay Cousin. Anyone with half a brain knew what he was when he was little. He was just very different from the 4-5 boys he was always around. The world tried to interact with him all the ways it would a normal boy, and it just didn't work. He is what he is. I started to think maybe it's more complicated than my understanding. And being as I work with problem kids all the time, I realize that pointing a finger at them and demanding them to be as we want is quite often a losing strategy. What was that old David Bowie quote?

"And these children that you spit on
As they try to change their worlds
Are immune to your consultations.
They're quite aware of what they're going through."

There's a really big difference between various medical treatments that have already been fully researched with their efficacy known, and mutilating the genitals of children and calling it a medical procedure without any longterm research into it's efficacy or any side effects. That's kind of the point people like me are trying to make. They're trojan horsing this stuff in like it's established medical science and we should give it the respect we give other established science, when it isn't and we shouldn't.