Anyone else think Trump will ultimately do more damage to the gender critical cause?

Tulsi, RFK jr, Musk and even Trump were all Democrats. Even if you personally don't like them, they are very popular appointments.

They might all be absolute charmers and excellent company, thatsthewayitis, but I don't judge politicians on whether on not they are personally likeable, but on what they stand for, and whether or not they have at least an adequate grasp of geopolitical and other facts relevant to the job they are doing.

Their appointments were popular with Trump's party, but weren't their confirmations opposed by all the Democrats + one Republican, which isn't exactly 'very popular', surely it's just 'popular along predictable party lines'.

Pro 19 year olds who get confused/don't care about the difference between Gaza in Mozambique and the Gaza strip?

Pro abandoning the constitution?

Whatever Trump represents it's not a sane alternative to Democrat idiocy.

@IwantToRetire And although I think he is both sexist and racist

What is your evidence he's racist?
The Secretary of State, Marco Rubio is Hispanic (Cuban) Tulsi Gabbard is Samoan, JD Vance has brown children (Indian), Kash Patel is Indian, the Secretary of the Treasury, Scott Bessent is gay, the Attorney General Pam Bondi is a woman.

Thanks for the correction, IwantToRetire, what a difference a word makes
I was about to post that organisations who have been banned from putting lists of groups in their recruitment material can remain committed to diversity in their actual hiring processes - to use NASA as an example again:

“NASA is on an ambitious journey to Mars and we’re looking for talented men and women from diverse backgrounds and every walk of life to help get us there,” said NASA Administrator and former astronaut Charles Bolden,

To help accomplish this work, NASA will select qualified astronaut candidates from a diverse pool of U.S. citizens with a wide variety of backgrounds.

Trump did not even read the two "gender" EOs

The damage DOGE are doing to the reputation of the USA is existential

Putin invested his money well buying Trump in 2016 via Manafort and Deripaska

Sorry to quote myself but I didn't check before posting so have misrepresented myself

So his attack on DEI is not about which minority group he hates the most, but the temerity and use of public money to promote people who in his view of the natural order of things are actually not able to get to the top by themselves.

Apolgies also for mixing up their and there. Not sure which is wilting faster my touch typing or my brain.

I dont think Trump will damage the fight for women's sex based rights because as far a I know no feminist group supports Trump.

Some feminists may support policies that restore women's sex based rights in sport etc., but doesn't mean they support Trump.

The worry will be as usual, that the TRAs and the self congratulatory left will sell the message that feminists supported Trump.

So when the shit hits the van for Trump (which will be whether his isolationist policies damagies the economy) there will be those on the hard left who want to pust the TRA agenda, who will say it is all the fault of terfs.

That's the problem.

As the OP illustrates the public perception is of some strands of feminism hero worshipping at Trumps feet - which is complete projection by the left who were and are too feeble to challenge Trump. So obviously it is women's fault that the left was a complete failure. Not their fault.

I think there is some confusion between one of Trump's pet targets, and actual anti - whatever, race, sex and so on.

What he does not accept and has asked all references to be removed is the idea that their are groups of people who because of say their sex or race should be given or expect more appropriate treatment.

So for instance they have just removed references to a report about violence against Native American Women https://www.huffpost.com/entry/donald-trump-white-house-live-updates_n_67aa443de4b0cced3687c9ec/liveblog_67b4f9e5e4b08e2e24824c73

And although I think he is both sexist and racist for him the logic is everyone should be treated the same, so there is no need for a special programme for women for a particular community.

In his mind / world view, white men (who may even be gay) naturally get to the top because they are the best.

So his attack on DEI is not about which minority group he hates the most, but the temerity and use of public money to promote people who in his view of the natural order of things are actually able to get to the top by themselves.

His programme is to stop anything that undermines the (natural) supremacy of white men.

Unless the Dems throw in with Doge and recognize women they will be on the outside for a long time. They need to be pro DOGE and become Centrist to come back.
Right now there are more registered Republicans than Democrats; that's a first!
Dem approval is down to 35% so low.
Tulsi, RFK jr, Musk and even Trump were all Democrats. Even if you personally don't like them, they are very popular appointments.
So I'm not worried.

Female sportswomen who identify as transmen need to put off using cross-sex hormones and surgery until their athletic career is finished.

Maybe it would not be unreasonable to say that people with trans identies need to put off using cross-sex hormones and surgery until their military career is finished if they want to join the military? This of course would also entail people using the correct barracks for thir sex, and they would also need to pass the correct fitness and medical examinations.

Most of the US military are supposed to be deployable at least in theory. See the graph here:
https://usafacts.org/articles/how-many-people-are-in-the-us-military-a-demographic-overview/

Nobody with what the US Govt regard as a delusional belief has the right to serve in the military. It's not just people claiming a trans identity.

(Also: This is a bit cheap of me, but if I was arguing like a TA, I would say: "So what if trans people can't serve in the military? I'm a pacifist and armies shouldn't exist.")

ETA: Figures from 2023

So make the argument that this surgery is not the responsibility of an employer.

'most of the armed forces don't serve on the front line.'

During peace time, during a war everyone in the armed forces has to be fit to be deployed to where ever the country needs to deploy them.

Every country has the right to chose only those who are fit to serve, it's not about 'rights' it's about what the country needs to defend it's self.

most of the armed forces don't serve on the front line. Where are the stats on people joining the army to get free hormones?

But this is exactly what I am afraid of. Up until now you could reasonably say to a trans person "tell me what rights don't you have?" Now they don't have the right to serve in the armed forces.

Tulsi Gabard may be a former Democrat, but she seems rather illiberal, she also a huge Putin fan and speaks glowingly about him.

RFK is demented, antivax, anti science, thinks WiFi alters the blood brain barrier and that mobiles cause cancer.

They're hardly centrists.

"One may protest against evil; it can be exposed and, if need be, prevented by use of force. Evil always carries within itself the germ of its own subversion in that it leaves behind in human beings at least a sense of unease. Against stupidity we are defenceless. Neither protests nor the use of force accomplish anything here; reasons fall on deaf ears; facts that contradict one’s prejudgment simply need not be believed- in such moments the stupid person even becomes critical – and when facts are irrefutable, they are just pushed aside as inconsequential, as incidental. In all this the stupid person, in contrast to the malicious one, is utterly self-satisfied and, being easily irritated, becomes dangerous by going on the attack."

Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Trump we can fight, the stupidity of GI, Queer Theory, CRT will be the death of the West if we don't stand up to it.

Right now Trump is all we've got, so Lock & Load.

People who lie about biological sex lie about other things too - shocker!

I've just found another example of scaremongering about women being 'removed' by the LGBTQ+ related EO.

For instance it was reported that the Rubin Observatory had removed any mention of Dr Vera C. Rubin after whom it was named, because of the alleged diktat to remove any mention of women in science.
In fact, the observatory website has a whole 'Who was Vera Rubin' page.

It looks like a lot of people are disseminating scare stories, and a lot of people are not applying the necessary pinch of salt...

Why not?

Because people were only signing up to the military to receive free hormones/surgery. And once they start on the transition process they are no longer able to serve on the front-line due to their requirement for continual artificial hormones.

It's the slippery slope argument again, just framed slightly differently.

"I don't want a restriction on trans rights,,, because abortion".

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5217266-times-article-re-us-military?reply=140073242&utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=share&utm_source=copylink

This has been discussed previously, so you may find this link interesting.

From their recent reporting, The Washington Post don't believe sex is a meaningful category, so it's not clear why they would care about Trump removing women's rights.

Trump isn’t gender critical. He just hates trans people.

we can protect women’s rights while still recognizing there are people who identify as trans and deserve to be protected too. We all deserve to go to school, get jobs, and have secure housing regardless of how we choose to present ourselves.

I also agree that it is lawsuits that will end the medical transition debacle.

I agree, lawsuits will change the situation in the US. Once insurance companies work out that covering these operations is a big financial risk, they will stop covering them, and that change will stay whoever is in power.