Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

The Democrats Need an Honest Conversation on Gender Identity Part 2

465 replies

Ingenieur · 18/11/2024 09:33

Starting a new thread in case the first fills up.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
11
themostspecialelfintheworkshop · 19/11/2024 10:03

RedToothBrush · 19/11/2024 08:37

It does really doesn't it?

The Dems didn't need to make a big deal of this.

And the side effect in demanding to use the shared facilities it shows up that it's not the toilet that is being used but the women in it.

Exactly. He's excluding Muslim and Jewish women, women with trauma, women with children and just women who want safety and privacy.

He doesn't care about them, he wants to at best use them as props for his validation (we all know what the 'at worst' is but even here we're not allowed to say it even though a lot of trans identified biological males talk about it all the time as well as demonstrate it in their behaviour all the time - see breast exposing Whitehouse man).

The POINT is access to women who don't consent and forcing their unconsenting exposure to someone they will perceive as a man in a woman's space. Not very inclusive.

Shortshriftandlethal · 19/11/2024 09:49

Shortshriftandlethal · 19/11/2024 09:09

Sorry for sounding a bit grumpy.....but i've had a lifetime of such dismissals......so I tend to keep it to myself and to my colleagues in the field.

Edited

Can I add that anyone familiar with Carl Jung, or who has practised Jungian therapy will be well aware of astrology as a body of knowledge.

Regarding forecasting ( though not the primary use of astrology), it is a practice used in many areas of study or knowledge whereby people look at the data, information, movements, formations and patterns of whatever it is ( weather systems, stock markets, consumer demand and so on)......and make educated guesses as to how that pattern will develop

https://jungiancenter.org/jung-on-astrology/

Shortshriftandlethal · 19/11/2024 09:09

Sorry for sounding a bit grumpy.....but i've had a lifetime of such dismissals......so I tend to keep it to myself and to my colleagues in the field.

Shortshriftandlethal · 19/11/2024 09:04

Ingenieur · 19/11/2024 08:57

Thanks @Shortshriftandlethal

It was a fairly flippant comment, but I'm happy to be corrected if you are able to share the utility of astrology as a tool.

You cannot expect me to distil a lifetime's knowledege and experience into a post on a forum such as this. Astrology is all in the application. I simply get sick of the script that " everyone knows...." . Astrology is not a belief or a faith.....it is rich body of knowledge, symbolism, pattern and formation...and being able to translate and decipher that is a skill.

It is not about telling people what will happen to them....it is about working with patterns and movements, images and symbols to aide self development and awareness.

it can also be applied at a global level....and that is where it gets particularly interesting when it comes to patterns and movements in the collective......such as we are witnessing now. Patterns shift and repeat through time, in slighlty different formations.....but the patterns and alignments themselves tend to be made up of the same basic component parts....though operating in changed fields and contexts.

Ingenieur · 19/11/2024 08:57

Thanks @Shortshriftandlethal

It was a fairly flippant comment, but I'm happy to be corrected if you are able to share the utility of astrology as a tool.

OP posts:
Shortshriftandlethal · 19/11/2024 08:45

Ingenieur · 18/11/2024 18:36

I reckon this is my main issue too.

Material reality shouldn't need to make way for an ideology grounded in absolute guff and all the problems spring from it being completely shallow and incoherent.

The sooner the Left as a whole recalibrates to recognise this we'll all be better off.

Perhaps then we can begin to have a discussion about what privileges we, as a society, are willing to offer someone whose beliefs are akin to astrology.

Actually astrology is a millenia old system and body of knowledge, full of rich symbolism. Just because it gets bastardised in the form of popular sun sign stuff does not negate it. I've been using astrology for over 40 years - and have to say it is the most incredible tool......if you truly learn its basics and have spent many years in study, observation and reflection.

I get fed up of people dismissing it in such flippant and blythe ways without having ever studied it for themselves.Just because there is a superficial pop science branch does not undermine it, any more than pop science under-mines hard science.

The scientific method involves study, application, testing , observation and refinement...it is a way to approach truth; not truth itself. Scientic method can be applied to anything.

RedToothBrush · 19/11/2024 08:37

Allthegoodnamesarechosen · 19/11/2024 08:30

‘He has a bathroom in his office’ ( toilet ).

Says it all, really.

It does really doesn't it?

The Dems didn't need to make a big deal of this.

And the side effect in demanding to use the shared facilities it shows up that it's not the toilet that is being used but the women in it.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 19/11/2024 08:35

Optics. Have the Democrats noticed yet that they can't talk about the real issues when the optics are all about trans and they divert all their energy to take action at the drop of a hat regardless of what they say.

YY, exactly. I honestly think many of them know it and think winning hearts and minds politically is less important than signalling their righteousness to the smaller number of people who agree with them.

Allthegoodnamesarechosen · 19/11/2024 08:30

‘He has a bathroom in his office’ ( toilet ).

Says it all, really.

RedToothBrush · 19/11/2024 08:21

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14098953/nancy-mace-trans-lawmaker-bathroom-capitol-hill-sarah-mcbride.html

A trans war has broken out on Capitol Hill after a Republican lawmaker proposed a measure that would block the first transgender member of Congress from using biological women's restrooms in the U.S. Capitol.

Rep. Nancy Mace is pushing for the new rule ahead of the arrival of Congresswoman-elect Sarah McBride, who will take office in January as the first openly-trans lawmaker in the United States.

McBride blasted Republicans after the proposal, claiming they were using it as a 'distraction' tactic.
'This is a blatant attempt from far right-wing extremists to distract from the fact that they have no real solutions to what Americans are facing,' McBride said in a statement.
'We should be focused on bringing down the cost of housing, health care, and child care, not manufacturing culture wars.'

Mace, a staunch conservative, stood by her measure.

'Playing make believe dress up doesn't mean you should be allowed in women's private spaces,' she wrote on X.

The proposal has set off a firestorm on Capitol Hill with Democrats rising to the defense of their soon-to-be colleague. McBride was elected last month and will take office in January.

'The cruelty is the point,' Democrat Rep. Becca Balint, a co-chair of the Equality Caucus, told Axios.
'This is not just bigotry, this is just plain bullying,' Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said.

Mace's proposal prohibits House members and staffers from 'using single-sex facilities other than those corresponding to their biological sex.'

The proposal would require the sergeant at arms to enforce the measure.

'Biological men do not belong in private women's spaces. Period. Full stop. End of story,' Mace said in a statement.

She told reporters on Capitol Hill she was standing up for women's rights and protecting female spaces.

Republicans backed the proposal with some suggesting expanding it to all taxpayer facilities.
'I support a resolution that keeps biological men out of women's bathrooms,' Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene told reporters on Capitol Hill.

She even suggested expanding it to 'all taxpayer funded facilities.'

'He is a man,' Greene said of McBride. 'He is not allowed to use our women's restrooms, our women's gym, our locker room, our spaces that are specified for women. He's a biological. He has plenty of places he can go.'

She rejected the notion of adding gender-neutral bathrooms to the Capitol.

'No he can go in the men's room. And he has a bathroom in his office,' she said.

She pointed out the election decided the issue, when many Americans showed their disapproval of biological men participating in women's sports.

'The American people spoke in the election. They're sick of this s*,' Greene said.

Oh dear.

Here's a trap of the Democrats own making. Will they walk straight into it? Yes, yes they will.

Optics. Have the Democrats noticed yet that they can't talk about the real issues when the optics are all about trans and they divert all their energy to take action at the drop of a hat regardless of what they say.

Meanwhile, yes it's a great distraction technique for the Republicans because the Democrats have created their own self trapping mechanism.

Facepalm.

First trans member lawmaker blasts GOP after bill blocks bathroom use

A trans war has broken out on Capitol Hill after a Republican lawmaker proposed a measure to block transgender women from using biological women's restrooms in the U.S. Capitol. 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14098953/nancy-mace-trans-lawmaker-bathroom-capitol-hill-sarah-mcbride.html

mcduffy · 19/11/2024 06:22

I got about 2/3 through the original thread and will go back and finish it, was one of the most informative I can remember reading. I especially enjoyed the Megyn Kelly YouTube link, she was a breath of fresh air

BabaYagasHouse · 18/11/2024 23:19

nauticant · 18/11/2024 19:00

It's not about womens rights really. It's that trans issues bring a focal point to all that's wrong in Democrat thinking.

And this is what helped to sink Kamala Harris because when this got exposed she was unable to put forward any counter to the Kamala is for they/them attack ads because these were her choices:
a) "I've changed my position" leading to Democratic activists losing their minds and going after her;
b) "Those are my views" which would have meant undecided voters fleeing from her; or
c) say something that's actually nothing at all because it's the choice with the least risk/damage.

Which brings us back to the subject of the thread. Democrats at the moment cannot have a honest conversation on gender identity because they cannot disown mad views that they've not only held for years, but have aggressively and ruthlessly enforced.

Which brings us back to the subject of the thread. Democrats at the moment cannot have a honest conversation on gender identity because they cannot disown mad views that they've not only held for years, but have aggressively and ruthlessly enforced.

As the story goes...

The Emperor shivered, for he suspected they were right. But he thought, "This procession has got to go on." So he walked more proudly than ever, as his noblemen held high the train that wasn't there at all.

UtopiaPlanitia · 18/11/2024 22:17

nauticant · 18/11/2024 19:39

That's fantastic. But also, Psaki actually put it up on Twitter herself with replies open and it went as well as you might expect:

https://x.com/InsideWithPsaki/status/1858213955954417883

Ouch! Those replies did not hesitate to tell her that she is definitely behind the times - she brought 2018 facts to a 2024 discussion 😣

nauticant · 18/11/2024 21:45

I think that's related to the famous phrase from The Atlantic about Trump:

“the press takes him literally, but not seriously; his supporters take him seriously, but not literally.”

biscuitandcake · 18/11/2024 21:40

nauticant · 18/11/2024 19:44

Trump can promise all things to all people. He can literally contradict himself in a single speech and white nationalists and black supporters will both have something to keep them happy. When asked, supporters will say "I like the fact he is going to do X but I don't really think he means it about Y". Whereas the Democrats can't - all but a hardcore group of supporters will notice that they are lying/contradicting themselves.

I think part of it is that as the Democrats have become more authoritarian on identity politics, there's been a move to expecting that everyone on their side must hold an approved set of beliefs, all of them without exceptions. As things stand at the moment, I think the Trump-supporting Right in the US are much more open about people on their side being on board over some things but not on others.

Yes... But there's a difference between, I don't know, me disagreeing with you on israel/palestine but we agree on women's rights so we work together on that. And us disagreeing on a fundamental level on one thing but both voting for the same person because we believe he has promised opposite things. There is working with people you disagree with and compromise - that always has to happen in a 2 party system. And the "believe what you want about reality" world of Trump. I agree that if all the other side has is "believe exactly what we tell you" they aren't offering a compelling alternative.
Eg no one knows what is happening with Trumps deport the immigrants rhetoric. Different people seem very convinced that he promised to deport different groups or definitely won't touch these people. I don't know who he is actually going to deport and no one else does either really.

RapidOnsetGenderCritic · 18/11/2024 21:03

BonfireLady · 18/11/2024 20:43

😁

If you repeat the words yourself, they might make more sense? 😉

Very little I say makes sense these days, according to someone who knows me quite well!

BonfireLady · 18/11/2024 20:43

RapidOnsetGenderCritic · 18/11/2024 20:27

Oh, come on, I'm not listening to that!

;-)

😁

If you repeat the words yourself, they might make more sense? 😉

Ereshkigalangcleg · 18/11/2024 20:34

After 9/11 we had a bunch of little twerps (mostly in Y9) hero-worshipping Osama bin Laden and wanting to join al-Qaeda. This was in a good school in a prosperous, historic Midlands market town. We had an assembly telling them not to do it.
Teenage boys can be very strange.

I remember there being several threads from teachers at the time of the GE saying that in the school mock election vote (something I hadn't known was a thing, but apparently was) most of the kids had voted for Reform.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 18/11/2024 20:29

I mean, imagine protesting against the rights of women in sport in Salem of all fucking places! Optics are hard to get more wrong.

Exactly, the memes and jokes write themselves.

RapidOnsetGenderCritic · 18/11/2024 20:27

DeanElderberry · 18/11/2024 19:25

Women are just there to be abused

That's not true @RedToothBrush, we're there to be ignored as well.

Oh, come on, I'm not listening to that!

;-)

nauticant · 18/11/2024 19:44

Trump can promise all things to all people. He can literally contradict himself in a single speech and white nationalists and black supporters will both have something to keep them happy. When asked, supporters will say "I like the fact he is going to do X but I don't really think he means it about Y". Whereas the Democrats can't - all but a hardcore group of supporters will notice that they are lying/contradicting themselves.

I think part of it is that as the Democrats have become more authoritarian on identity politics, there's been a move to expecting that everyone on their side must hold an approved set of beliefs, all of them without exceptions. As things stand at the moment, I think the Trump-supporting Right in the US are much more open about people on their side being on board over some things but not on others.

nauticant · 18/11/2024 19:39

UtopiaPlanitia · 18/11/2024 19:22

It seems that some Democrat Party members (ex-Biden Administration staff) are not open to changing their minds with new facts and I think Benjamin Ryan sums this up well:

https://x.com/benryanwriter/status/1858376843415404708

‘Jen Psaki accurately asserts that there are few trans kids playing in sports. But she falsely claims there’s no evidence that such kids pose a threat to fairness. There are studies finding that natal males, even on estrogen, have a competitive advantage’

There’s a video clip of Psaki saying these things in the tweet I quoted above.

That's fantastic. But also, Psaki actually put it up on Twitter herself with replies open and it went as well as you might expect:

https://x.com/InsideWithPsaki/status/1858213955954417883

biscuitandcake · 18/11/2024 19:32

nauticant · 18/11/2024 19:00

It's not about womens rights really. It's that trans issues bring a focal point to all that's wrong in Democrat thinking.

And this is what helped to sink Kamala Harris because when this got exposed she was unable to put forward any counter to the Kamala is for they/them attack ads because these were her choices:
a) "I've changed my position" leading to Democratic activists losing their minds and going after her;
b) "Those are my views" which would have meant undecided voters fleeing from her; or
c) say something that's actually nothing at all because it's the choice with the least risk/damage.

Which brings us back to the subject of the thread. Democrats at the moment cannot have a honest conversation on gender identity because they cannot disown mad views that they've not only held for years, but have aggressively and ruthlessly enforced.

Its not just gender identity that they are a bit stuck on, though thats so obviously at odds with reality its a bit of sore subject. Thanks partly to the internet (or maybe twas always thus) people aren't neatly slotted into political party beliefs but are quite widely spread out in their beliefs - often with quite sharp red lines so:
pro-Israel V pro Palestine
Womens rights V trans-rights
Ukraine (to support or not)
Covid handling and vaccines in general
Climate stuff
enforcing the border

Its not that everyone cares about all those issues, but most engaged people will care really strongly about 1/2/3 and it's not as if all the trans-rights people also support Palestine - they are all over the shop. So if the Democrats take a strong clear line on any of them, they risk alienating a chunk of people. If they take a strong clear line on all off them they risk alienating most because (for example) someone might agree with their stance on Ukraine but disagree with their stance on women's rights.
Trump can promise all things to all people. He can literally contradict himself in a single speech and white nationalists and black supporters will both have something to keep them happy. When asked, supporters will say "I like the fact he is going to do X but I don't really think he means it about Y". Whereas the Democrats can't - all but a hardcore group of supporters will notice that they are lying/contradicting themselves. And people also noticed when they were vague/not answering the question. Maybe that's not fair, but it is how it is and the Democrats response (to just double down on clearly untrue things or try to ignore the issues) feels wrong. I think they tried to copy Trump by going for style over substance, vibes and big rallies but they aren't Trump so it doesn't work. So, hopefully they will at least try to prioritise honesty and clarity even if it isn't what everyone wants to hear. And be rewarded for that in 4 years. Otherwise I worry Trump's methods will just get copied elsewhere and it becomes a race to the bottom. But in a weird way, at least the fact that people did clearly notice the untruths in the TWAW slogans will be a wake up call.

DeanElderberry · 18/11/2024 19:25

Which is why @BonfireLady is perfectly reasonable.

DeanElderberry · 18/11/2024 19:25

Women are just there to be abused

That's not true @RedToothBrush, we're there to be ignored as well.