Anyone else worried Trump’s advocacy of gender-critical views taints and discredits them?

No. The hard of thinking people I agree with you about are pathetic.

A start might be to stop blaming the Left/leftists/Democrats for everything the Right does, and making assumptions about what left-leaning groups/people think. (This is general and obviously not aimed at you.)

Yeah, his stance on trans issues has been determined by a team of well paid political analysts who have looked at all the polls and all the data coming out of social media engagement in all 50 states and calculated how many votes taking each possible stance is likely to win or lose in each political battleground. His personal views don't even come into it.

Trump is not making these decisions. He is doing what he is told by the people around him. This is Republican Party strategy. I understand that plenty of people can't possibly support it because they take opposite view of whatever the Republicans say. But these are people who run with the crowd, who do exactly as they are told by their peer group. I have no interest in the views of anyone who is like this.

Not at all. I agree with the general gist of them, but not the execution, nor the reasons they came to be.

“I think the EOs were a good thing” makes you a Trump supporter as much as any of us, like it or not, Messina

I’d better say that I don’t think Trump is equivalent to people who advocated or defended slavery. The comparison was supposed to illustrate how someone (or party) can do good things even if everything they have done is not good. Even if some things they have done is bad.

This.

I’m so glad that there is some pushback in the US against the promotion of what amounts to the abuse of children and trampling of women’s rights. I’m so glad for human rights that they are finding pushback to foisting their anti-scientific ideology on impressionable, vulnerable and/or unconsenting women and children. Even sending some funding worldwide, it seems. Even though such novel, damaging and anti-scientific beliefs are couched in terms which try to conceal what they were/are doing to the human rights of women and children.

I suppose the corollary guilt by association would be how the Democratic Party are accused of being pro slavery, as opposed to the Republicans who outlawed it. Indeed they even wished to allow slavery to expand into the west of the US if the citizens voted for it. Before the civil war.

Do I think that any civil/human rights achievements of the Democrats are tainted by their pro slavery stances? No. If it is a good thing, it is a good thing.

@MessinaBloom your "prediction" was mere common sense - everyone here knows that agreeing on one thing doesn't mean agreement with everything.

Your final paragraph isn't very meaningful though Again, posters here might say it doesn’t matter as long as these things happen. I think it does. I’m not getting in bed with the wolf even though he seems harmless. - none of us are in that bed. Most of us aren't in the USA (obviously some are) so don't get to vote anyway. What do you think we should be doing differently? Condemning Trump's EOs because his motives behind them weren't pure?

Making a prediction that overall posters will express support for the EOs that benefited women and children while not supporting many other actions by Trump? Who is incidentally the democratically elected President of a country that many posters don't live in or have ties to.

Considering those same sentiments have been posted over and over and over and over again on numerous threads, some coming at it from a slightly different aspect. That prediction seems like a sure bet really.

You mean without anyone being able to provide any reasons why people with differing views might be able to nonetheless have shared positions on other things?

How would that be? You mean with most posters talking common sense?

This thread is progressing exactly as I predicted.

Reality doesn't change based on who acknowledges it. Donald Trump probably also believes that the earth isn't flat, 2 + 2 is 4 and water is wet.

The actions of a self-serving POTUS on another continent has no bearing on my knowledge of the truth - there are two sexes. Anyone who links the two is desperately hard of thinking.

And honestly, most diversity training is really quite shit, and it's not evidence based either - there's no evidence that it improves attitudes, and some that it makes them worse. A lot of it is self-contradictory bollocks.

I don't know where this idea that diversity training is the be all comes from, it's been around for about 5 minutes, and during a time when racist attitudes, including on the left, have grown exponentially.

They have stopped DEI initiatives, at least for now.

The Democrat talking point is that this means no one in schools can even talk about homosexuality, or slavery, or women's rights, in any context. That's not really what DEI is though - DEI is a particular lens on these subjects, one that many people think is fundamentally unethical.

I beg your pardon? Did you call me pathetic?

They might be under the diversity umbrella, but let's be honest here, how much LGBTQIA+++ diversity training do you think actually focuses on boring old gay and lesbian people these days?

Didn't the trump administration stop all diversity training in schools ? I think Gay people are under the "diversity umbrella " @TempestTost

TempestTost

I watched Jamie Read's recorded livestream of the Peterborough event and it was seriously disconcerting to see the same old trope points being made at Jonah Wheeler. Who took it all in and just replied simply that he had taken the time to listen to women and to detransitioners.

When he added, 'should I have ignored them' and the answer 'yes' was yelled out, it really showed the level of entrenchment that is there in that party. That they think that he should ignore the women and the detransitioners, and the opinion polls, was appalling to hear. That they couldn't even have a discussion.

My take away from that and the resounding silence that continues from Democratic Party leadership is that they will only move their position in about 2 years time as there is a cacophony of detransitioner voices and law suits and when more and more of the sporting federations have followed World Rugby, World Athletics and others. When the opinion polls have continued to show the same results as they are now showing in the UK and USA, I cannot see how that party could continue to ignore women and detransitioner's voices.

Sadly, I expect that they will continue to double down.

I disagree. Bigotry is intolerance of the views of others (as displayed by nearly all trans activists). Trump is not intolerant, he is opportunistic. If he thought transactivists, or any other cause, would benefit him then I am sure he would promote it. Democrats have handed him a golden opportunity to win the presidency and the majority of Americans on a silver platter and he is running with it.

Anyone else worried Trump’s advocacy of gender-critical views taints and discredits them?

No. I do find it genuinely interesting that a hugely sexist meglomaniac shares the same perspective as me on single sex sports, services etc, but that we have pretty much no shared perspectives on anything else. It's proof to me that, thankfully, I've moved on from the simplistic world view I had when I was 13 years old.

I have never seen anything that suggests that Trump has an issue with gay people. He hasn't done anything politically to oppose them, he doesn't seem to have been bothered by them in his private life before politics, his mentor was a gay man, he has appointed a number of homosexual people to important positions in his government. He danced with the Village People at his inauguration for goodness sake. He's never, as a politician, spoken out against things like same sex-marriage.

This is another case, from what I can see, of people on the left assuming that because of things like his view on the Ukraine, he must somehow also be homophobic, because apparently all bad ideas are one bad idea. Which is frankly silly.