Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Somewhat grown up piece from Trans US Representative

38 replies

NumberTheory · 18/06/2025 01:36

Sarah McBride, the first TiM to be voted into the House of Representatives in the US talking about why the trans movement lost in the US in the New York Times. There doesn’t seem to be any suggestion that the goal of gender replacing sex everywhere is an unreasonable one, but it is a thoughtful examination of what the activist movement in the US did and how and why it was a failure.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/17/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-sarah-mcbride.html

https://archive.ph/xOmav

OP posts:
SionnachRuadh · 18/06/2025 07:16

And McBride applied that predominantly to trans activism but also to other aspects of left activism. I also read an undercurrent of frustration with broader queer theory influencing the Democratic Party.

Important to remember that McBride is from Delaware and has a political career based on being extremely close to the Biden family. I rather doubt that McBride is very radical on issues other than trans, or has much affinity with the Omnicause activists who have become much more influential in recent years.

Gettingmadderallthetime · 18/06/2025 07:09

Very interesting read. McBride is going to make headway, wisdom in their suggestions. Not sure whether the sensible opinions will make headway against those locked in a purity spiral. Everyone gains if there is discussion and conversation and trying to understand (well everyone except extremists who won't ever be happy). McBride does not say how we achieve that adult dialogue.

I believe that discussion and conversation and educating does not necessarily help the TRA side or result in public support for more trans 'rights'. I suspect (hope) it will result in a 'this and no matter more' line of general agreement about key issues by people across the political spectrum.

Wouldn't it be great if trans people could feel safe and GC people could too?

Kinsters · 18/06/2025 06:32

I couldn't read that whole thing. He's fundamentally misunderstood that it's not lack of hearing the arguments - it's that we've heard and understood and shock horror disagree. I also think that most of what he says isn't relevant to the UK where we're not seeing a roll back of gay rights or abortion rights (in fact it's the opposite) so viewing the push back against trans as part of a wider picture of a shift to the right is inaccurate. Irrelevant navel gazing imo.

PermanentTemporary · 18/06/2025 05:35

Good quote about the language becoming about signalling you’re in the in-group.

PermanentTemporary · 18/06/2025 05:35

Oh I liked that. McBride is a very interesting person. Good quote about the language becoming But yes, still the message that there is a perfect set of beliefs (unspecified) which some people haven’t got to yet, rather than any actual fundamental problem or sex difference that can’t be eliminated with time. But of course it is a different conversation in the States, a large chunk of Trumpists including lawmakers look certifiably insane and yet they’re colleagues. I can understand any political American’s frustrations with trying to live life and do politics with these nutters who’s only aim is to scream loudly for TikTok, particularly when one of them is the president.

Original poster
NumberTheory · 18/06/2025 05:11

MyAmpleSheep · 18/06/2025 04:32

There is a very different conversation in the US on this subject. There's it's all about politics: left and right. Here the conversation is framed in the language human rights.

Yes. And there is a powerful misogynistic right wing that is anti gender identity in US, which is not the case in the UK.

Nevertheless a lot of TRA tactics seem to come directly from the US and to see some pulling away from the toxic rhetoric may mean changes in the UK.

OP posts:
MyAmpleSheep · 18/06/2025 04:32

There is a very different conversation in the US on this subject. There's it's all about politics: left and right. Here the conversation is framed in the language human rights.

Original poster
NumberTheory · 18/06/2025 03:01

NotBadConsidering · 18/06/2025 02:19

I have only read the first bit but I would summarise it as:

”We didn’t stay sneaky enough”

”We weren’t good at emotional blackmail”

“We failed with the forced teaming”

I would say it was more along the lines of- we were arrogant and stopped trying to persuade. We failed to look outside our bubble. We tried to silence people instead of listening and talking. And McBride applied that predominantly to trans activism but also to other aspects of left activism. I also read an undercurrent of frustration with broader queer theory influencing the Democratic Party.

As I said, though, no acknowledgment that their goal might be flawed or that there might be legitimate concerns about some aspects of what they want and a need to compromise.

OP posts:
Original poster
NumberTheory · 18/06/2025 02:53

Then I’m not sure, adulting. I’m abroad at the moment and have an NYT subscription so it might all work a bit differently for me. Maybe others who can access the links could help. It’s too long to cut and paste in, I think.

OP posts:
adultingforever · 18/06/2025 02:28

I did try the archive.ph link.... same result.

NotBadConsidering · 18/06/2025 02:19

I have only read the first bit but I would summarise it as:

”We didn’t stay sneaky enough”

”We weren’t good at emotional blackmail”

“We failed with the forced teaming”

Original poster
NumberTheory · 18/06/2025 02:07

adultingforever · 18/06/2025 01:59

Link does not work for me.... I get nginx. Is there another way to read this? Can someone summarize?

Did you try the archive.ph link too?

OP posts:
adultingforever · 18/06/2025 01:59

Link does not work for me.... I get nginx. Is there another way to read this? Can someone summarize?