2020 Democratic presidential candidates’ positions on sex-based rights

I reported myself asking to remove the bad word. Agree it was un-called for

OK Grinitch Sorry. Will stay on topic

We’re not name calling unless you believe repeating what someone has said verbatim is somehow wrong. It’s not a hatchet job. People are free to like her or not. Defend her if you wish but the reason why people are turning against the ‘lefties’ is that you consider someone reposting a tweet of someone they themselves made as being ‘name calling’.

It won’t go down well here but I’m probably more in favour of Trump than Clinton. Her Bill is seriously worse on the sexual assault front and whilst she’s not personally to blame she ferociously defended him and tried to ruin his victims. I’m not just talking about womanising either. Look up Jeffery Epstein. Our Prince Andrew was in deep too.

As for the abortion thing that always happens under a Republican government. It flips and flops continuously. I serIously doubt Trump cares on a personal level. He’s too selfish to give a shit. He was Democrat the majority of his life prior to running for Presidency

“We wouldn’t need to talk about bathrooms at all if we acted like adults, washed our hands and minded our own business instead of trying to clock others. Going by track record, I’d feel safer in a bathroom with a trans woman than a powerful male executive any day of the week”. I would have immediately asked why should a woman have to share with either category (ignoring that no one has suggested that such powerful male executives should be in women’s bogs) but she gets a free reign and adoration from the left and if the right attack then they’re bigoted anyway.

I’m a bloke. Shouldn’t be so invested as it doesn’t impact me much in reality. Men have kids though. They have daughters. I don’t currently but still horrified about the state of affairs. It’s like we’ve went backwards and you ignored basic science. Like people who think the earth is less than 10 thousand years old or flat earthers who think we live on a coffee table with a lamp that moves across day to day

Cortez said people should get over the bathroom issue and she would feel safer sharing with a transexual than one of those misogynistic and depraved powerful Hollywood producers (like Weinstein I’m assuming). Nobody seemed to pick up on or question that there are zero people campaigning for or advocating powerful male executives should be allowed access to the ladies. Proper pointless virtue signalling statement bereft of any sense of honesty but she’s woke and people look love her. Only people who call her out are right wing Republicans so they’re instantly dismissed. That’s politics but despair at the lack of nuance and critical and thinking across all stripes

I don't have a good feeling about the next 10 years.

I predict Trump will not win again, and one of these leading dem candidates will get in.

I think Pelosi's equality act is going to be passed, and will be in force for at least 4 years, if not 8.

Grinitch I forgot to thank you for starting this thread.

I'm trying to compose a letter (in my head) to the abovementioned women and Ruth Bader Ginsberg. I have no idea how to keep it concise and include relevant points. It's so complex what we are up against.

Re:AOC's first "privilege" reference in that podcast: I thought about it and began to wonder if she was playing for brownie points (votes, endorsements, $), while not exactly throwing women under the bus. But now with the "correction" I'm not giving her the benefit of the doubt. This is a latina, working class woman. Also, I remember when the term "underprivileged" was used for poor people, so maybe there is a weird dis-connect with semantics?

I hope they keep tantruming away

AOC is becoming a real liability for defeating the Equality Act. She tweeted an apology for saying cisgendered, instead of cisgender. How can we educate her and the others?

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on twitter. 470 replies, 2 GC

@AOC
4h4 hours ago
More
💜🏳️‍🌈 if we want a country where all people are accepted and loved, we have to name and rectify where we historically haven’t so we can act to do so now.
(Also - sorry I said “cisgendered” instead of the correct “cisgender.” I’ve learned and am growing too✨)

The one possible line of attack on Dems here is via suburban Republican women. Democrats have been courting them for years — they really really want suburban Republican women voters to switch over to them. But I can well imagine, if they know about it, these same voters being appalled at the the extent to which the Equality Act eliminates ALL single-sex services, spaces, activities, and set-asides.

I follow American politics somewhat, and I believe that any Dem running against Trump will toe the line here. They all court Millennials, and among left-leaning Millennials self-ID appears to be pretty much a tenet of faith.

(On economic policies I find Warren and Sanders -if he runs- great, and I very much embrace Gabbard's anti-war and noDAPLA stance. But yeah, I doubt them, or any other Dem candidate will question self-ID).

Placemarking - good resources here

Thanks Grinitch. Placemarking.

I'd also be interested in @RedToothBrush*'s thoughts on this.

I know, I know... third party candidates get demonized because they often "spoil" the election, BUT Schultz seems like a reasonable moderate? He's pretty middle of the road, and I question whether or not he's had much of the gender Kool-Aid... yet.

Everyone else in the Democratic line-up seems to be pretty punch drunk.

Good post, BTW. We have GOT to get more discussion and organizing going in the States. Our UK sisters have been so successful!

Thanks for this! Looking forward to seeing the thread grow as more candidates declare.

Seems like the only gender critical choice here is Donald Trump. Feel sorry for the feminists of America who might have to join the MAGA gang to protect their sex-based rights but it's the only way.

No Democratic candidate is going to break ranks on this. It's not a salient issue for most Americans, so it's not worth the headache for the candidate.

Democrats can safely assume that female voters will regard abortion rights as more important and the Republicsns too odious to vote for. They have every reason to assume Democratic women will vote for them no matter how they betray women with an Equality Act that functionally erases female protections.

The plain truth is, the Democrats have so taken women's votes for granted, while presiding over continual rollbacks of women's rights and never suffering for it, that perversely feminists now actually have more tactical maneuvering room with the Republicans.

This is the reality of power and politics under a two-party system in which the range of idea, due to corporate money on both sides, is very narrow.

I'm not talking about principle. I'm talking about leverage and power.