Although I'm glad the radical feminists are pushing against the trans movement, as a classical liberal/progressive conservative I'm not prepared to join them in any protests. Their voices should be heard along with conservative/traditional voices in turning the tide on this diabolical movement that endangers women, children and tradition…
Although I'm glad the radical feminists are pushing against the trans movement, as a classical liberal/progressive conservative I'm not prepared to join them in any protests. Their voices should be heard along with conservative/traditional voices in turning the tide on this diabolical movement that endangers women, children and traditional families along with the trans persons who've been misled by doctors and psychologists.
If you think that the trans movement should be opposed, why are you not willing to join in "protests"? What is it about being a "classical liberal/progressive conservative" that makes you content to sit on the sidelines? Pushing against transgender ideology and activism can and is taking many forms, not just street demonstrations or picketing. Take a look at the many different things that Women's Liberation Front is doing: https://womensliberationfront.org
You have totally misunderstood me. I won't join a group of radical feminists in a protest but I do protest in my own way. To my senior community centre, for example, when they celebrated LGBTQ Pride Day. They are a Jewish organization and such lifestyles are against Jewish law. Believe me, it didn't endear me to the administration, which is filled with non-religious woke types. I don't need the women's movement to speak my mind and I don't sit "on the sidelines".
In a pluralistic, democratic society such as ours, we should not be casting people as "enemies or friends". Things get accomplished when people form coalitions on particular issues or policies without having to agree on other issues or policies. Most things can get bipartisan support because they really are not partisan issues. I am not trying to make friends when I work with Republicans and Independents in Oregon to get certain legislation passed or block other legislation. But neither are they my enemies, just because we disagree on many issues. I am pragmatic. Many good things can be accomplished by collaborating and cooperating with people on things we agree on. (Actually, I do feel that some of the Republicans and Independents that I work with are now my friends. There is absolutely no reason why friends have to agree on everything politically or otherwise.
The problem with forming coalitions with folks who don't share your views on most things, but do on one issue is that it reduces your credibility on the other issues. When you have a clear set of values, you think twice about who you associate with.
People need to stop judging people's credibility based on who they associate with and who they form coalitions with on specific issues. Right now, if we "think twice" and do not join with conservatives on stopping harm to women and children by the transgender movement, then women and children will continue to be harmed. Many irreparably. My credibility and that of anyone should be assessed by facts like human sex cannot be changed and that men/males cannot be women/females, nor is any child "born in the wrong body". I fully understand your point, but unfortunately that is stopping many women and men from advocating for what they know is right! My values are very clear, but I am also pragmatic. I know that many women are afraid to be thought to be conservative if they express agreement with attempts in red states to pass laws prohibiting males from participating in girls' and women's sports or prohibiting the use of puberty blockers, hormones and surgeries on minors in the name of "gender affirmation". Meanwhile, in blue states, thousands of girls and boys under 18 are being provided with hormones by Planned Parenthood and other medical providers which cause irreversible, harmful effects, despite the fact that a majority of Democrats oppose such medical interventions for minors. We need Democratic candidates and office holders willing to buck the current party line and have the courage to stand up and speak out against the harm being done to children. Having values does not get anything done to implement those values. I care about getting things done to stop people from being harmed.
First, I'm Canadian and I do have conversations with my Member of Parliament (not my Congress person) even though he is not with the party I voted for - which is Conservative. I'm well aware of the medical and psychological damage to trans persons, but it's the medical and psychological associations that need to be pressured, not the politicians. And they won't be influenced by a bunch of radical feminists with signs. If I was an American my main concern would be ensuring a fair voting process and then I'd vote for Trump because he already stated that if elected, he'd make it a criminal act for anyone to give or approve gender transitioning drugs and/or procedures to persons under 18. Trump's other policies are also something I approve of, even though some of them pit the US against Canada in certain trade issues. Under Trudeau Canada has become a socialist joke with basic freedoms being denied and the woke mob reigning supreme. Finally, as an individualist (not a collectivist, as you seem to be) I would tackle any immediate concerns with the trans movement by removing my kids from public school and either homeschooling or sending them to private. If more individual families did the same thing, you'd see the left's stranglehold on public schools - which promotes gender transitioning and other principles of critical race and gender theory - end.
Given the context of Canadian politics, your comments here make more sense. What a mess of gender ideology in the schools. Also Conservative has a different meaning with Provinces and school districts in Canada.
However I must push strongly against your statement about Trump. He has never demonstrated any ability or real interest in actually getting policy passed. It is 100% about looks and attention. Anyone who trusts that he could work with the US Congress to pass anything substantial is not being realistic. It would only supercharge the hardcore fringe.
There’s a recent poll that the majority of Americans strongly disagree with gender ideology for children. The activist fringe is trying to hide these results and rebrand puberty blockers.
Ah yes. Trump's policies passed by Executive Order not through Congress, which made them easy for Biden to overturn. (BTW: Obama did the same thing.) And yes, Trump is a master showman who excels at playing up his achievements (however temporary or fraught with difficulties). Unfortunately, Trump's policies are not popular with many Republicans (RINOs?) as well as Democrats. Therefore, the likelihood of him getting bills through Congress - whether mostly Dem or mostly GOP - is bleak unless Americans can convince/pressure their congress people to vote for them. Re the poll you mentioned: I'm glad to hear it. I sense the average Canadian, regardless of political affiliation, feels the same way but few are lobbying their Members of Parliament.
Exactly. If you read my response to Holly Hart, you'll see that I protest in my own way. I don't want to be associated with radical feminists because they don't represent my views.
Most protests are self-indulgent, attention-seeking orgies of anger and the least effective form of activism. In fact, they are often counterproductive. Why should anyone be bullied into joining a mob and putting out more hate into the world? Maybe this person wants to engage in something hopeful or constructive. A mob is a mob regardless of what they claim to represent. Also, cancelation is a real phenomenon. Going public with one's beliefs carries great risk, and therefore it's a private, personal decision that everyone deserves to be able to make on their own, free from bullying, coercion and harassment.
Do you remember a TV series called Transcendence? In one episode the lead character - a trans guy - visits a feminist retreat and is not exactly made to feel welcome! My chief concern is the gender identity issue because those who espouse the ideology are not looking for equal rights - they want to proselytize and recruit. Why else would they target schools, libraries and other venues that children attend? I also don't support open demonstrations of LGB lifestyles in faith-based places where such lifestyles go against their religion. There is such a thing as religious freedom, too. Live and let live. We don't have to assert our own rights by tromping on others' rights.
I must have missed that tv series but you point to an issue re whether a woman who has 'transed' herself will be accepted into a given group. I guess it would depend on the group or enough people in the group as to acceptance or no acceptance. I would have an issue w/ a woman pretending to be a man or who has hormonally or surgically mutilated herself unless she was a de-transitioner. I have more empathy for de-transitioners but the others who have tried to opt-out of being a woman I find more difficult. So-called gender non-conformity in a woman is fine but it is off-putting when that woman tries to become an ersatz man. As to your other remarks. First, I don't consider being gay or lesbian a lifestyle--the Amish have a lifestyle-- but most LGs live like everyone else. Secondly, I don't like public displays of affection be they hetero or homo unless it's mild like holding hands. Thirdly, I don't think it is appropriate to confuse kids w/ the gender nonsense. Just leave kids alone and if a kid is obviously so-called gender non-conforming be supportive as a teacher but do not invalidate him/her by saying they were 'born wrong' or the absudity of being 'born in the wrong body.' No person is born in the wrong body--what utter lunacy.
Those voices have been heard. You may not be aware of the joint protests by conservative, liberal, feminists, lesbians, lesbian feminists at the American Assoc. of Pediatrics convention in San Diego not long ago. Of course, MSM does not cover these events, that would make it harder to maintain the narrative that only 'right-wing' conservatives are against the pernicious 'trans' movement.
I'm glad the medical profession is finally being challenged by nearly everyone for what amounts to atrocities done to healthy bodies. I once read an article about the complications and side effects of male-to-female surgical transitioning and thought I was reading something out of the journals of the Nazi Dr. Mengele. This information is being withheld from the public by the trans lobby - and even, at times, from prospective trans patients. To allow these procedures (and transitioning drugs) to be administered to people under 18 is criminal. Say what you want about Trump, I heard one of his speeches a few months ago where he promised to make transitioning of people under 18 a criminal act, punishable by a prison sentence. I wish other politicians would take the same stand. Physical atrocities aside....the assault by trans people on women's sports is disgusting. So is the "unisex bathroom". I've heard many mothers say they will not allow their children into such bathrooms unattended. I would like to add something else: prior to the trans movement Gay Pride events were not targeted to children. The hetero public (including me) had no issue with them. It's only recently, where you have this whole "transitioning" discourse being taught in schools and the introduction of Drag Queen story hours for children at schools and libraries, that the hetero public went ballistic. If that is not recruitment, I don't know what it. But there's a kind of logic going on. The trans movement embraces the notion that one can "choose" gender, so recruitment is possible. If I understand correctly, the majority of the gay/lesbian community does not believe gender and sexual preference is a "choice", but innate. Two diametrically opposed ideas, yet the trans movement seems to have gained traction.
The 'trans' movement did not just gain traction they took over every legacy LGB and women's org. New women's and LGB orgs had to be created to counter the 'trans' narrative. 'Trans' 'gender identity' is an astro-turfed movement w/ a lot of money and influence--power-- behind it. Drag Queens--many are hetero--have no place in schools or around minors--they are a disgusting display of misogyny and porn-addled, sexualized content that I think is, in part, to desensitize minors to cross-dressing men that are not always safe to be around.
Also, I assume you know that the 'trans child' is an invention as cover and prop for the hetero autogynephiles/transvestic fetishists--those males w/ an erotic fixation--sexual fetishes and some w/ paraphilias. And most of the men who cross-dress and pretend to be women have no surgeries (not that it matters, they are still males). See the clip below from an interview w/ Helen Joyce, author of 'Trans, When Ideology Meets Reality.'
Joyce explains the heterosexual men who are the "nuclear reactor" of the 'trans' movement and why the need to invent the fictional 'trans child.' And that kids who are non-conforming to sex stereotypes do often grow up to be LGB--it is innate. But the 'trans' movement has parasitically adopted that innateness fact about LGB sexual orientation and grafted it onto their male sexual fetish or erotic fixation movement.
Fascinating. I suspected a lot of what was going on was sexual fetishism but never heard it described that way until now (and very well, I might add). I also wasn't aware that many Drag Queens are hetero. The critical gender literature I read in university (well, back in the 1990s so I go back a long way) represented them always as gay men. (So do films like "The Birdcage"). So yes, the whole thing reeks of misogyny, sexual fetishism - and with this latest business of "performing" for children, pedophilia. Thanks for the link. I'll read it.
Although I'm glad the radical feminists are pushing against the trans movement, as a classical liberal/progressive conservative I'm not prepared to join them in any protests. Their voices should be heard along with conservative/traditional voices in turning the tide on this diabolical movement that endangers women, children and traditional families along with the trans persons who've been misled by doctors and psychologists.
If you think that the trans movement should be opposed, why are you not willing to join in "protests"? What is it about being a "classical liberal/progressive conservative" that makes you content to sit on the sidelines? Pushing against transgender ideology and activism can and is taking many forms, not just street demonstrations or picketing. Take a look at the many different things that Women's Liberation Front is doing: https://womensliberationfront.org
You have totally misunderstood me. I won't join a group of radical feminists in a protest but I do protest in my own way. To my senior community centre, for example, when they celebrated LGBTQ Pride Day. They are a Jewish organization and such lifestyles are against Jewish law. Believe me, it didn't endear me to the administration, which is filled with non-religious woke types. I don't need the women's movement to speak my mind and I don't sit "on the sidelines".
The enemy of my enemy is NOT necessarily my friend.
In a pluralistic, democratic society such as ours, we should not be casting people as "enemies or friends". Things get accomplished when people form coalitions on particular issues or policies without having to agree on other issues or policies. Most things can get bipartisan support because they really are not partisan issues. I am not trying to make friends when I work with Republicans and Independents in Oregon to get certain legislation passed or block other legislation. But neither are they my enemies, just because we disagree on many issues. I am pragmatic. Many good things can be accomplished by collaborating and cooperating with people on things we agree on. (Actually, I do feel that some of the Republicans and Independents that I work with are now my friends. There is absolutely no reason why friends have to agree on everything politically or otherwise.
The problem with forming coalitions with folks who don't share your views on most things, but do on one issue is that it reduces your credibility on the other issues. When you have a clear set of values, you think twice about who you associate with.
People need to stop judging people's credibility based on who they associate with and who they form coalitions with on specific issues. Right now, if we "think twice" and do not join with conservatives on stopping harm to women and children by the transgender movement, then women and children will continue to be harmed. Many irreparably. My credibility and that of anyone should be assessed by facts like human sex cannot be changed and that men/males cannot be women/females, nor is any child "born in the wrong body". I fully understand your point, but unfortunately that is stopping many women and men from advocating for what they know is right! My values are very clear, but I am also pragmatic. I know that many women are afraid to be thought to be conservative if they express agreement with attempts in red states to pass laws prohibiting males from participating in girls' and women's sports or prohibiting the use of puberty blockers, hormones and surgeries on minors in the name of "gender affirmation". Meanwhile, in blue states, thousands of girls and boys under 18 are being provided with hormones by Planned Parenthood and other medical providers which cause irreversible, harmful effects, despite the fact that a majority of Democrats oppose such medical interventions for minors. We need Democratic candidates and office holders willing to buck the current party line and have the courage to stand up and speak out against the harm being done to children. Having values does not get anything done to implement those values. I care about getting things done to stop people from being harmed.
First, I'm Canadian and I do have conversations with my Member of Parliament (not my Congress person) even though he is not with the party I voted for - which is Conservative. I'm well aware of the medical and psychological damage to trans persons, but it's the medical and psychological associations that need to be pressured, not the politicians. And they won't be influenced by a bunch of radical feminists with signs. If I was an American my main concern would be ensuring a fair voting process and then I'd vote for Trump because he already stated that if elected, he'd make it a criminal act for anyone to give or approve gender transitioning drugs and/or procedures to persons under 18. Trump's other policies are also something I approve of, even though some of them pit the US against Canada in certain trade issues. Under Trudeau Canada has become a socialist joke with basic freedoms being denied and the woke mob reigning supreme. Finally, as an individualist (not a collectivist, as you seem to be) I would tackle any immediate concerns with the trans movement by removing my kids from public school and either homeschooling or sending them to private. If more individual families did the same thing, you'd see the left's stranglehold on public schools - which promotes gender transitioning and other principles of critical race and gender theory - end.
Given the context of Canadian politics, your comments here make more sense. What a mess of gender ideology in the schools. Also Conservative has a different meaning with Provinces and school districts in Canada.
However I must push strongly against your statement about Trump. He has never demonstrated any ability or real interest in actually getting policy passed. It is 100% about looks and attention. Anyone who trusts that he could work with the US Congress to pass anything substantial is not being realistic. It would only supercharge the hardcore fringe.
There’s a recent poll that the majority of Americans strongly disagree with gender ideology for children. The activist fringe is trying to hide these results and rebrand puberty blockers.
Ah yes. Trump's policies passed by Executive Order not through Congress, which made them easy for Biden to overturn. (BTW: Obama did the same thing.) And yes, Trump is a master showman who excels at playing up his achievements (however temporary or fraught with difficulties). Unfortunately, Trump's policies are not popular with many Republicans (RINOs?) as well as Democrats. Therefore, the likelihood of him getting bills through Congress - whether mostly Dem or mostly GOP - is bleak unless Americans can convince/pressure their congress people to vote for them. Re the poll you mentioned: I'm glad to hear it. I sense the average Canadian, regardless of political affiliation, feels the same way but few are lobbying their Members of Parliament.
That's a good point.
You're overthinking—again. It's a tribal maxim that explains much of human behavior, more than political coalition building (and fracturing) does...
Exactly. If you read my response to Holly Hart, you'll see that I protest in my own way. I don't want to be associated with radical feminists because they don't represent my views.
Most protests are self-indulgent, attention-seeking orgies of anger and the least effective form of activism. In fact, they are often counterproductive. Why should anyone be bullied into joining a mob and putting out more hate into the world? Maybe this person wants to engage in something hopeful or constructive. A mob is a mob regardless of what they claim to represent. Also, cancelation is a real phenomenon. Going public with one's beliefs carries great risk, and therefore it's a private, personal decision that everyone deserves to be able to make on their own, free from bullying, coercion and harassment.
LGBs have been fighting against 'gender identity' nonsense as well--esp. lesbian feminists-- who have been doing so for decades.
Do you remember a TV series called Transcendence? In one episode the lead character - a trans guy - visits a feminist retreat and is not exactly made to feel welcome! My chief concern is the gender identity issue because those who espouse the ideology are not looking for equal rights - they want to proselytize and recruit. Why else would they target schools, libraries and other venues that children attend? I also don't support open demonstrations of LGB lifestyles in faith-based places where such lifestyles go against their religion. There is such a thing as religious freedom, too. Live and let live. We don't have to assert our own rights by tromping on others' rights.
I must have missed that tv series but you point to an issue re whether a woman who has 'transed' herself will be accepted into a given group. I guess it would depend on the group or enough people in the group as to acceptance or no acceptance. I would have an issue w/ a woman pretending to be a man or who has hormonally or surgically mutilated herself unless she was a de-transitioner. I have more empathy for de-transitioners but the others who have tried to opt-out of being a woman I find more difficult. So-called gender non-conformity in a woman is fine but it is off-putting when that woman tries to become an ersatz man. As to your other remarks. First, I don't consider being gay or lesbian a lifestyle--the Amish have a lifestyle-- but most LGs live like everyone else. Secondly, I don't like public displays of affection be they hetero or homo unless it's mild like holding hands. Thirdly, I don't think it is appropriate to confuse kids w/ the gender nonsense. Just leave kids alone and if a kid is obviously so-called gender non-conforming be supportive as a teacher but do not invalidate him/her by saying they were 'born wrong' or the absudity of being 'born in the wrong body.' No person is born in the wrong body--what utter lunacy.
Also look at what WDI (Women's Declaration International) is doing: https://womensdeclarationusa.com/
Those voices have been heard. You may not be aware of the joint protests by conservative, liberal, feminists, lesbians, lesbian feminists at the American Assoc. of Pediatrics convention in San Diego not long ago. Of course, MSM does not cover these events, that would make it harder to maintain the narrative that only 'right-wing' conservatives are against the pernicious 'trans' movement.
I'm glad the medical profession is finally being challenged by nearly everyone for what amounts to atrocities done to healthy bodies. I once read an article about the complications and side effects of male-to-female surgical transitioning and thought I was reading something out of the journals of the Nazi Dr. Mengele. This information is being withheld from the public by the trans lobby - and even, at times, from prospective trans patients. To allow these procedures (and transitioning drugs) to be administered to people under 18 is criminal. Say what you want about Trump, I heard one of his speeches a few months ago where he promised to make transitioning of people under 18 a criminal act, punishable by a prison sentence. I wish other politicians would take the same stand. Physical atrocities aside....the assault by trans people on women's sports is disgusting. So is the "unisex bathroom". I've heard many mothers say they will not allow their children into such bathrooms unattended. I would like to add something else: prior to the trans movement Gay Pride events were not targeted to children. The hetero public (including me) had no issue with them. It's only recently, where you have this whole "transitioning" discourse being taught in schools and the introduction of Drag Queen story hours for children at schools and libraries, that the hetero public went ballistic. If that is not recruitment, I don't know what it. But there's a kind of logic going on. The trans movement embraces the notion that one can "choose" gender, so recruitment is possible. If I understand correctly, the majority of the gay/lesbian community does not believe gender and sexual preference is a "choice", but innate. Two diametrically opposed ideas, yet the trans movement seems to have gained traction.
The 'trans' movement did not just gain traction they took over every legacy LGB and women's org. New women's and LGB orgs had to be created to counter the 'trans' narrative. 'Trans' 'gender identity' is an astro-turfed movement w/ a lot of money and influence--power-- behind it. Drag Queens--many are hetero--have no place in schools or around minors--they are a disgusting display of misogyny and porn-addled, sexualized content that I think is, in part, to desensitize minors to cross-dressing men that are not always safe to be around.
Also, I assume you know that the 'trans child' is an invention as cover and prop for the hetero autogynephiles/transvestic fetishists--those males w/ an erotic fixation--sexual fetishes and some w/ paraphilias. And most of the men who cross-dress and pretend to be women have no surgeries (not that it matters, they are still males). See the clip below from an interview w/ Helen Joyce, author of 'Trans, When Ideology Meets Reality.'
Joyce explains the heterosexual men who are the "nuclear reactor" of the 'trans' movement and why the need to invent the fictional 'trans child.' And that kids who are non-conforming to sex stereotypes do often grow up to be LGB--it is innate. But the 'trans' movement has parasitically adopted that innateness fact about LGB sexual orientation and grafted it onto their male sexual fetish or erotic fixation movement.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xUrtNW6Fzo&t=664s
Fascinating. I suspected a lot of what was going on was sexual fetishism but never heard it described that way until now (and very well, I might add). I also wasn't aware that many Drag Queens are hetero. The critical gender literature I read in university (well, back in the 1990s so I go back a long way) represented them always as gay men. (So do films like "The Birdcage"). So yes, the whole thing reeks of misogyny, sexual fetishism - and with this latest business of "performing" for children, pedophilia. Thanks for the link. I'll read it.