The Democrats Need an Honest Conversation on Gender Identity Part 2

[Ingenieur]

Starting a new thread in case the first fills up.

Everyone I know who voted for Trump did so for economic reasons. All of them have a gay or trans family member or friend and support general rights and protections for those people. I live in a very red state, as well.

I see this election as more of an incumbent issue that is happening everywhere with elections (France, Britain, New Zealand, likely Canada next year) right now, and less of a rejection of gender politics.

@LesbianNana:

"Actually the 14 million who didn’t show up for democrats this year will likely never show up again, as they were an anomaly in 2020.

2016 Hilary Clinton received 65,853,514 votes
2012 Barack Obama received 65,915,795 votes
2008 Barack Obama received 69,498,516 votes

This year votes increased for both parties but are closer to average turnout for democrats.

Also, Trump won with 76,430,999 votes this year and he lost with 74,223,975 in 2020. So he received 2,207,024 more votes this year."

Perhaps asking why so many democrat voters didn't turn out to vote in 2024 is the wrong question?

Maybe the right question is how the hell Biden got 81,283,501 votes in 2020, and where did they all come from?

How could Biden possibly have got 17% more votes than Obama did in 2008, and 23% more than Obama did in 2012?

Maybe Trump was right...

The Wi Spa incident wasn't someone playing make believe - it was a sex offender. That shouldn't be forgotten.

I see this election as more of an incumbent issue that is happening everywhere with elections (France, Britain, New Zealand, likely Canada next year) right now, and less of a rejection of gender politics.

I think it's not just a rejection of gender politics when it comes to social issues, but the message did land, that "Kamala Harris is for they/them, President Trump is for you." And that campaign has been proved to have resonated with swing state voters, as discussed (with evidence) earlier in the thread, or the previous one).

People mostly see this issue as irrelevant nonsense, right, but that doesn't mean that the Democrats pushing it hard didn't have a negative impact.

Well trans ideology (not trans people) is a threat to gay people, hence how many are now speaking up. You can't have same sex attraction / love if sex isn't a thing and transing away the gay is a concern for many.

We know the forced teaming that's gone on but gay men and lesbians are increasingly speaking up against this.

Trans people don't have any fewer rights than anyone else. No-one should have a right to take away others rights or use unconsenting women by deception. On sky news Australia it was said gender issues was the biggest issue (above the economy) for swing voters in the US.

I dunno, I was at a party last month when that ad came on the TV and everyone laughed at how ridiculous it was, and most of them were Republicans. They know it's not the main issue or even one of the big minor ones.

This argument lacks logical rigour.

Im sure you agree with white supremacists that water is wet and the sky is blue. Are you 'discomforted' by that?

The question here is not why right leaning people support the primacy of sex as the key differentiator. The question is why left leaning people have (very recently) rejected such an obvious truth.

People laughing at this stuff is an excellent development.

Texas briefly outlawed "being trans in public" and made it criminal to do so.

I would be find with third spaces. I am not ok with throwing people in jail for how they dress or wish to be addressed.

Lol it was not in the way you would have liked.

Don't be so sure about that. The more laughter there is about this the less people feel unable to speak.

I get that for most voters this isn't an important consideration.

The reason that this is an important issue in this election cycle wasn't that it was a big deal, or the most important issue for red or blue voters, it's that it was the most important issue among swing voters.

If the Democrats want these votes back they need to address it.

Don't be so sure about that. The more laughter there is about this the less people feel unable to speak.

Exactly. Laughter is great. It's absurd that so much attention is devoted to this ideology.

The question here is not why right leaning people support the primacy of sex as the key differentiator. The question is why left leaning people have (very recently) rejected such an obvious truth.

In a nutshell.

Are you OK with people referring to each other based on how they perceive each other?

Who cares if only a small percentage of people are concerned about this, eh?

In the context of an election where the margin of victory is usually a couple of percent.

What lesson should a sensible political party take from that for next time?

It's also not necessarily an issue for voters on it's own but it's the Dems showing themselves as untrustworthy liars who are willing enforce obvious untruths in an authoritarian, undemocratic way that's the issue. I suspect this is the issue for a lot of men.

They're not affected directly by loss of women's rights and safeguarding for children (though they may well care about their wives and children) but they do care about being talked down to by someone who is trying to enforce Orwellian 2+2=5 newspeak. That's not democratic at all.

Most people know as a matter of fact that men are stronger than women (the reason why there even is a female category in sport) and humans can't change sex.

There's a good chance that the Democrats won't learn the lesson from this election. The denial and gaslighting is strong and might win out.

Maybe they'll need to be disappointed by the electorate again before it sinks in and there can be a realignment.

Sex offenders won't be bothered if trans women aren't allowed in bathrooms. Sex offenders will just go in regardless.

Also, for the record, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever of any link between white supremacists and women's rights activists

Simply the latest poor effort to slur women standing up for women's rights.

You could say that about burglars, but I bet you lock your door all the same.

Why do you do that?

That dusty canard?

Women need to be able to challenge men in our spaces to limit the opportunities for those men to offend.

Using 2016 arguments isn't enough any longer.

But let's stick to the Dems and their election results, shall we?

Not true. Used to be that if men tried to go into women's single sex spaces then you could complain and have them removed without being called a bigot. It's had a chilling effect. Plus many policies now say spaces are mixed sex even if they're not labelled as such. And we know mixed sex spaces have far higher rates of sex crimes against women and children.

Th idea that all "belief "systems that aren't physically observable are equally valid seems a bit of a stretch.

Gender ideology is quite incoherent.

Have we got to BINGO yet?

I think we're missing 'oh but let's not bother trying to prevent the trauma and pain of sexual assault because women and girls aren't really human and men's wants matter more there are laws against it so women can go through the double trauma of prosecuting after the fact'