The Democrats Need an Honest Conversation on Gender Identity Part 2

That would be great

That's a great tweet. Thank you for sharing.

The excerpt that you've pulled out is so pertinent.

I wish I could transport myself outside the Supreme Court right now with it written on a giant billboard.

And I agree re DEI training. Diversity within workplaces really is important. It's the overreach that's the issue. I've never been a fan of quotas of any kind - including all women shortlists where roles are top-heavy with men - but still value other approaches which address barriers. What I don't value one bit is the enforcement of a belief that I don't hold. I don't believe that everyone has a gender identity any more than I believe in god or Allah. Neither of the latter two are forced on me as if they are true. Gender identity belief is an exception that has run wild and it needs to stop. The impact of this enforced belief is far greater than a medical scandal and the erosion of women's rights. It's stifling both free speech and what could otherwise be great DEI training.

i really really wish the Attagirls would put it all in a book!

Thank you for this- perfect to read about Lila Clunas on this day in particular.
May women never wheesht!

but i don't want DEI training to row back on actual inequalities and discrimination that people face. Racial discrimination and in particular disability discrimination needs to be addressed, still. Urgently in a lot of cases. Sex discrimination too.

It is the absolute batshittery of everything being eclipsed by TRA nonsense that grates.

On X the Attagirls posted about Lila Clunas today.

The Attagirls on X: "Woman of the Day teacher and suffragette Lila Clunas (1876-1968) of Glasgow. Her specialities: making deputations, writing copious letters to the press about women’s suffrage, and heckling MPs. Especially heckling. Strictly non-partisan, she was expelled from public meetings for https://t.co/7Va8A8phsg" / X

the pertinent part for me is when she had a meeting with Churchill about women getting the vote, his reply was:

"Lila badgered Winston Churchill with letters pleading the case for women’s suffrage with the result that she secured a thirty minute meeting with him for herself and seven other suffragettes at the Queens Hotel. The outcome was not what she had hoped for. Churchill was impervious to their reasoning and told them that they needed to demonstrate “that they had on their side millions of women”, that “the frenzy of a few was not a substitute for the earnest wishes of millions…these tactics of silly disorder and petty violence” would not make the government concede."

seems pertinent, and some politicians might like to have a think about his words very fucking carefully (not sorry for swearing, i am boilingly angry about a lot of things right now)

It will be really shit if the batshittery of "some men are really women because reasons" is used as a reason to push back initiatives that support groups in society who are genuinely unfairly treated. It's almost certainly going to happen, is alreday happening.

The Times are reporting that Walmart are rowing back on race and gender DEI initiatives after pressure.
Including ending some "racial equity staff training and has agreed to review its support for Pride events and withdraw from rankings by the Human Rights Campaign, an LGBT advocacy group.
Walmart also said it would monitor online merchants for sexual or transgender products marketed to children and remove items where deemed necessary"

www.thetimes.com/business-money/companies/article/walmart-drops-diversity-initiatives-after-pressure-from-activist-b76nq3c38

A poster said on another thread that acting/sounding reasonable is the new TA strategy.
We'll see how long they can keep it up...

Interesting article in todays NYT

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/26/us/politics/transgender-activists-rights.html

https://archive.ph/XMPLh

And the thing is he's still being called a genocidal Nazi anyway.

They will never forgive him, however much he grovels.

This morning I listened to the November 16 Blocked and Reported podcast. Very interesting on the way issues parcelled together as 'woke' and particularly the gender arguments came to dominate some areas of American life, notably publishing, in the last decade, how much resentment that has caused and how completely tone deaf Biden was. Very interesting - there's a bit of waffle at the beginning but it's well worth persisting.

podcasts.apple.com/ie/podcast/episode-237-time-for-a-re-reckoning-with-kat-rosenfield/id1504298199?i=1000677308017

The excerpt above isn’t the full discussion; the rest is available here from about 1hr 19m onwards:

Interesting and informed discussion between Megyn Kelly and two other female podcasters discussing the influence of the ‘trans debate’ on American politics, and Ray Blanchard gets a namecheck too:

On the article further up about Rep. Seth Moulton.

Well, now. It appears to me that his view of rights correspond to how they would benefit/impact Seth, and his two daughters directly. Other people’s daughters? Meh.

“Moulton, 46, who led a platoon in Iraq as a Marine, has been pushing Democrats to embrace younger leaders since at least 2018. That’s when he spearheaded an unsuccessful effort to deny Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi the speakership—angering many progressives who dubbed him a sexist. (There was even a hashtag dedicated to Moulton and his co-conspirators, #FiveWhiteGuys.) In 2019, he briefly ran for president in the Democratic primaries. The highlight of Moulton’s campaign was an evocative speech_ he gave in which he revealed his struggle with post-traumatic stress disorder.”

What is good for the ‘bros’ just might benefit Seth! And all empathy for the trials of Seth. However, ne’er a bother about the traumas, and damage to women as a result of the stuff he got put his power behind as a public Representative.

“On top of that, until recently, he actually supported trans girls competing athletically with girls, signing a November 1, 2023 letter with other House Democrats that called on President Joe Biden and Democratic congressional leaders to reject any “anti-LGBTQI+ provisions” in the budget. One of those anti-LGBTQI+ provisions would have barred federal funds from being used to help team sports make room for transgender athletes.”

Well, now. If he did all that, knowing that the immutable sexes actually exist, and how it would impact women and girls, maybe his public utterances and performances will depend on which way the public relations aspect benefit his image best. They might alter when they alterated reception find.

Maybe he’d be happy with a clause added that his daughters are uniquely not discrimated against/ damaged by the legislation he supports. Other people’s daughters, I’m not seeing much concern. Indeed a reminder of ‘first do no harm’, even if it is to mere women and girls, might be useful reminder to a bro like Seth.

Seth is doing that wet non apologising apology thing after realising that others have not got a spine despite telling him differently privately.

I think he knows he's been found out.......On one hand wholeheartedly repeating the TWAW slogans and enabling policy to further that, but on the otherhand declaring he knows that males remain male even after transition if they happen to be playing sport

He's stuck his neck out and found he's become a target for hate. This could destabilise his career and his reputation in the Democrat party; so he's picked the easier option of effectively apologising and back-tracking.

Seth, of course, can only think of women in terms of their relationship to a man (he is worried about his daughters) but if he'd had only boys he'd be oblivious?
Despite being, presumably, married to a woman who squished those daughters from her nether regions. He may even have seen that happen.

Women are human beings and deserve all the rights that come with that, regardless of their relationship with or to some bloke.

All very á la the prosecuting QC in the court case over ‘Lady Chatterley’s Lover’. ‘It is a book you would even want your wife or your servants to read.” The gallery which Seth addresses doesn’t seem to include the equal rights of women and girls to full recognition. In any, and every, aspect of our lives. The full human (with corresponding entitlement of agency) is never the woman or girl.

The good Seth has delivered his support on the extent of what he has decided women are. Subject to the wishes of what men and pliable women (including Seth) pronounce. To be recognised, or respected, as no more than a notion in any man’s head. And if any man chooses to proclaim himself to be a woman, who do actual women think they are, or what right do they think they have, to point out that no man changes into a woman. Ever.

Maybe Seth will voice this view on sports, as they take place in public. Seth can’t pretend to be fair minded towards women and girls when everyone is witnessing to what it is he would be complicit. Maybe Seth (and others like him) feel less open to scrutiny of their stance when the damage to women can be kept under the radar of public scrutiny and mainstream reporting. Out of sight (and therefore public scrutiny) and out of mind is acceptable. The threats, and discomfort, of any man (with any intention) having the opportunity to access women’s toilets, changing rooms, refuges and shelters etc. The abuse of locking women up in prison with men, many of whom are sex offenders. The cuckooing (by men) of actual women in representation of women’s groups, boards etc. Removal of opportunities and fairness, safety and dignity in other instances from women and girls don’t appear to be as troubling to Seth and his ilk.

I may be wrong of course. Maybe Seth will come to stand up for the injustices and injuries against women and girls, rather than the desires and entitlements of some men to trample all over the rights of women and girls. Maybe Seth just doesn’t know the extent of damage this anti-scientific, misogynistic ideology inflicts on women and girls. I’ll wager he’ll be ever so surprised (and exhibit great shock) when he publicly finds out.

re-educated to believe that they are attracted to people of the same gender*, not sex.

I saw the "they/them" ad many times and unfortunately to the best of my knowledge everything in it was correct; I remember thinking "Shit, how embarrassing, this is all correct." Progressives already found it easy to dismiss everything Republicans said as lies so probably weren't eager to address the underlying issue, which is that Democrats are insisting that everyone engage in sex denialism, so chose to basically do an "I know you are, but what am I" with the trans prison surgeries thing, which also occurred under the Trump administration.

I think the claim is that people who saw the they/them ad only voted Republican, or didn't vote Democrat and stayed home, because they agreed with the specific thing mentioned in the ad. They don't want taxpayers money being used to pay for sex changes for illegal immigrants who are in prison. Just that. They seem to believe that otherwise voters are fine with the trans agenda.

Fortunately, it doesn't seem possible to roll your eyes right out of your head.

I'm glad Moulton has said something about girls' sport and the unwillingness of his party to countenance unorthodox views, however he still doesn't get it. He and Nancy Mace are fighting for the same thing - women-only spaces.

He says sex realists do not believe trans people exist - so what? If he thinks it is comparable to saying that homosexual people just need to be re-educated, perhaps he can point to the proof of this gi that supposedly everyone has? Because I can point to proof of homosexuality in humans and its incidence in animals. It's his own side that believes that homosexuals must be re-educated to believe that they are attracted to people of the same sex.

Obviously, people who believe they have a GI exist. I just don't believe that anyone does have a gender identity, but I don't care if someone believes that about him- or herself. Genderists insist that everyone - everyone - has a GI. Does that mean that genderists don't believe that sex realists exist? Are they denying our existence? We certainly know they think we need to be re-educated.

He's worried about sport because he has two daughters, one of whom will just have started school and the sport issue will affect them.

And as for his belief that there is a balance to be struck between the rights of women and the rights of males who claim to be women... Jeez. Wake up.

It's a start from Moulton, but no more than that.

They're batshit. And unelectable

And the thing is he's still being called a genocidal Nazi anyway.

So he is TWAW unless they decide to play a sport his daughters might take up?

And bloody hell: being pro women's rights isn't "anti trans" unless those "rights" trans people think they're missing out in are women's sex based rights. Then they still aren't "anti trans" they are about keeping women's spaces single sex