The Democrats Need an Honest Conversation on Gender Identity

[Ingenieur]

An interesting article in The Atlantic today, and a sign the tide might be turning in the USA.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/11/democrats-dishonest-gender-conversation-2024-election/680604/

Most voters think that biological sex is real, and that it matters in law and policy. Instructing them to believe otherwise, and not to ask any questions, is a doomed strategy. By shedding their most extreme positions, the Democrats will be better placed to defend transgender Americans who want to live their lives in peace.

Baby steps

Do you believe trans women are women?

I posted this on another thread but it's relevenat here so reposting:

Polling is showing that the number 1 issue for voters who swung to Trump was the trans issue.
Not the number one issue for most voters, which was inflation and then immigration, 'culture issues' were third.

But number 1 for the voters that swung to him.

This is huge. It won him the election.

I got this from Megyn Kelly yesterday. She also brilliantly credits all the women who fought this for years who forced Trump to do it and who changed her mind.
And most of them are British 😁!

It's about 45 mins in. It is Big News. For politicians everywhere

x.com/megynkelly/status/1856162987435757932?t=znDpyv2A8SfGkSPi72nNlg&s=09

I’ve already said, more than once, that I do not.

Well the word "woke" doesn't apply to you then, does it?

Actually I doubt Trump had to do much to achive this swing.

They had advertised their batshit postion themselves for 4 years.
Everyone could remember:

Dylan Mulvaney at the White House.
Kamala writing to congratulate him.
Rachel Levine.
Sam Brinton.
LBGTQI flags on the white house.
TAs baring their fake tits at a White House garden party.
Kamala going on Drag Race to launch her campaign.
Their silence on Lia Thomas, and legislation to support it.

Everyone with any sesne could see they had embraced a lunatic position as 'righteous'.

But yeh, it was the right calling this batshittery 'woke' which was the problem not the lunacy itself.

Keep telling yourself that, keep losing.

🙄

It does undermine your response. And your answer is not an answer, it's just handwaving at a vague shape behind a curtain.

Obviously there are bad actors, disinformation and bots on both sides. There are bad actors, disinformation and bots playing both sides because they benefit from conflict and lack of trust.

Nevertheless, the Democrats could have easily undermined Trump's strategy with a few clear explicit statements yet chose not to. Why?

Unless you are suggesting the Democrats are themselves bad actors who deliberately threw the election due to "a whole networked ocean underneath"? In which case I suggest you have fallen into the smart person's trap of being so eager to see what others miss that you fail to see the obvious.

How about insane?

I think t'was the Russians / Chinese wot did it!

Ah well. In cybersecurity, we tend to see the world in a different light. In this world, we deal with constant attacks. Usually, these attacks aim to steal valuable data - financial, personal, military - or hold the data for ransom. This is far more common than you know. Every organisation/institution has firewalls to protect against such attacks, but the attackers can move around them. The great majority of these attacks come from China, Russia, North Korea and Iran.

Take my warning or leave it. But don’t make fun of it.

The Democrats couldn't counter the Trump campaign on trans because they had to keep silent about it. To offer a counter they had two choices. Choice one was to have lied outright and have said that they were never actually enthusiastically onboard with the ideology. Choice two was to have said they've changed their position and were no longer on board. What they didn't have, in terms of political reality, was a choice to have doubled down.

Both available choices would have caused a nightmare for the Democrats. The Trump campaign would have really ramped up focusing on lying and flip-flopping, the activists would have lost their minds and would have gone hard for the Harris and Walz over a massive betrayal, the mainstream of the party would have been very disillusioned, and it might even have been too much for the mainstream media, resulting in some very difficult questions.

So were ;

Lia Thomas
Dylan Mulyvany
Rachel Levine
Rose Montoya

etc etc all planted by the 'bad actors' to destabilise the Democrats?

I mean this is fascinating....

What if it was, Dime?

What does this have to do with the fact that the party which just lost the US election actually does claim to believe women can have penises?

No. I’ve explained this before. These events occurred, but were amplified way beyond their significance.

Do they though? Source?

The Democrats wouldn't have to go along with it?

I'm sure there is media manipukation to stir anger operating behind the scenes.

But what about what everyone actually saw the Democrats do??

Did the Chinese force Biden to invite Dylan Mulvaney to the White House?

Did Iran make them appoint and defend Sam Britton?

Was Rachel Levine funded by Russia?

Our emotions can be manipulated but we also have eyes, and can read policy.

I mean the Democrats didn't have to kowtow to them, did they?

How did the 'bad actors' know how they were going to respond? And how the electorate would respond to that!

I mean it's fascinating that you think like this but back in the real world the Democrats STILL need an honest conversation on gender identity.

People don't want it whoever has worked their evil to use it to destroy women's rights.

It isn’t as though the Russians told the Democrats they were doing it.

This is was a good read. While Helen Lewis' article was good, it is really important to make sure these inaccuracies are addressed. Helen Lewis does have some deliberate blind spots.

Ah we could see the lunacy but it was the silly electorate thinking it was significant, that was the problem.

EyeofOrion you have an interesting few years ahead to continue arguing this. Good Luck.

Fascinating how the narrative has shifted in a mere week...

That commentary from Sapir is excellent. I hadn't come across him before, but he's absolutely right.

Helen Lewis does have some odd blind spots about this. She seems to think it's still possible to find a middle ground.

You know, it’s getting harder to be bothered.

Thanks though.