The costs of trans visibility
Yesterday, Dylan Mulvaney broke her silence: https://www.tiktok.com/@dylanmulvaney/vi....
For context, this is a trans influencer who built a 10 million strong following on TikTok. She took a brand deal with budweiser to post an ad on an instagram, and the anti-trans right went absolutely ballistic, calling for a boycott, condemning the company, and to some perhaps unknowable degree it influenced that Budweiser sales dropped by a 1/4 and
. Dylan speaks more personally about the effect of the hatred on her.
What strikes me about this story is that it is just about visibility. This isn't inclusion in sports or gender-affirming care for minors, it was just that a trans person was visible. This wasn't even visibility in a TV commerical that a poor right-winger is forced to see, it was an ad on her own instagram page. We're all in our own social media algorithm influenced bubbles, but from my vantage point it really has seemed that in the last year or so things have just gotten worse for trans people and the backlash to even minor visibility is growing.
We need to do better.
The difference is that the page you linked to has headlines and talking points that claim that those percentages pertain to all the American students.
So the article simultaneously claims that their poll applies to all students, while clearly pointing out on several occasions within the article that they used a subsample of that population? Okay.
What we can definitely say is that people are willing to admit they will lie about their racial heritage if there are perceived social benefits.
This story of a brutal murder of a young trans girl has come to something of a close: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-manc...
This story of a brutal murder of a young trans girl has come to something of a close: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-manc...
I’ve thought a lot about it. I don’t really think it’s constructive to write about all the nuance involved in this horrific murder but I will say this:
It’s sad to see someone come so close to seeing true freedom for trans people but have that freedom taken away violently by small minded scum just before sunrise. If there is a heaven Brianna Ghey will be one of the most loved people there.
Pretty poor logic here, especially from a moderator. Did you really think he meant that he should be able to decide government policy on his own? Or that he was just explaining his opinions on what said policies should be, the same as you are doing.
I guess you missed this post.
Originally Posted by Luciom View Post
should we play this game again? a guy writes that "who am I to say what I want for medical procedures on others".
I answer u ****ing pay for them so I have a right to talk.
someone else comes and says "it's a representative democracy so you actually don't matter".
wait a sec. my point was just that I could express what I think should be cover and what shouldn't with my money. then ofc I hope my representatives pick up this preference and legislate accordingly.
which, guess what, they somewhat are doing in some jurisdictions.
I would prefer no healthcare had ever anything to do with any political choice. no subsidies. given I live in a world where the majority wants to pay for healthcare for everyone's then I talk about what is worthy of coverage and what isn't.
Ok. I took your post wrong then. Of course everyone can express their opinion. I was responding to your statement that you have the right to decide, rather than just express an opinion. That's a big difference.
you want any money from me I get a full right to decide when, if, how, why it is spent in full detail
As you can see, he didnt say anything in the post I quoted about being able to express an opinion. He clearly stated that if he pays, he has a RIGHT TO DECIDE..
So yeah, I respond to what people actually say in their posts. They get to choose the words they use.
So the article simultaneously claims that their poll applies to all students, while clearly pointing out on several occasions within the article that they used a subsample of that population? Okay.
What we can definitely say is that people are willing to admit they will lie about their racial heritage if there are perceived social benefits.
Yes, we agree that lots of white people will lie about their racial makeup to try and get a perceived edge in getting into college. Hell, if their parents are rich enough they will lie and claim they are national level athletes to get athletic scholarships in sports they've never played.
Yes, we agree that lots of white people will lie about their racial makeup to try and get a perceived edge in getting into college. Hell, if their parents are rich enough they will lie and claim they are national level athletes to get athletic scholarships in sports they've never played.
In order for them to gain to do so, being non-white should be an objective advantage, which runs counter the claim that being white is actually a privilege
In order for them to gain to do so, being non-white should be an objective advantage, which runs counter the claim that being white is actually a privilege
I think their belief that minorities have such an advantage in admissions is a myth they have bought into. That's why I said a perceived advantage rather than an actual advantage. So then they prove they dont have the integrity expected by the admissions officers to actually qualify for admission anyway by lying on their applications.
I think their belief that minorities have such an advantage in admissions is a myth they have bought into. That's why I said a perceived advantage rather than an actual advantage. So then they prove they dont have the integrity expected by the admissions officers to actually qualify for admission anyway by lying on their applications.
Myth? Courts had to intervene and declare the practice of favouring Latinos and blacks in college admissions unconstitutional, because it happened everywhere
I guess you missed this post.
As you can see, he didnt say anything in the post I quoted about being able to express an opinion. He clearly stated that if he pays, he has a RIGHT TO DECIDE..
So yeah, I respond to what people actually say in their posts. They get to choose the words they use.
I wrote that before I saw your follow up post.
But I still think it was obvious that he has a right to jointly decide along with every other taxpayer.
It is actually pretty analogous.
You may recall that what started the satanic panic was adults acting on what unreliable children believed to be true, possibly due to the influence of adults asking leading questions.
I was saying that the second one is the analogous one. People thinking that teachers (and other nefarious entities) are using their magical abilities to make kids transgender is the panic.
I wrote that before I saw your follow up post.
But I still think it was obvious that he has a right to jointly decide along with every other taxpayer.
It's a immature, unrealistic and impractical belief that the payor has a right of control or decision-making in every instance. If you ever had a non-working spouse or teenager living in your home, you would recognize how futile this belief is in the real world. In the theoretical world, I guess this belief has some legs and even stretches to things you indirectly pay for.
It's a immature, unrealistic and impractical belief that the payor has a right of control or decision-making in every instance. If you ever had a non-working spouse or teenager living in your home, you would recognize how futile this belief is in the real world. In the theoretical world, I guess this belief has some legs and even stretches to things you indirectly pay for.
"I can't control my wife overspending so voters should never be allowed to discuss how taxpayers money is spent" - jjjou
Are they under or over 13? Over 21?
My family has paid millions and millions in taxes over the last decade. By that logic, I get a much bigger say.
Also, millions of lgbtqia people pay taxes.
My family has paid millions and millions in taxes over the last decade. By that logic, I get a much bigger say.
Also, millions of lgbtqia people pay taxes.
In monarchist land having more money would actually mean having a bigger say (outside of minors protection and other topics unrelated to redistribution) because the totality of redistributive efforts would only be private, so instead of redistributive taxes, you would simply donate to whatever cause(s) you consider worthy of your money.
That said,
Does every gay person agree with taxpayer subsidized, or insurance mandated, puberty blockers for pre puberal kids?
The letter salad acronym doesn't work on this topic (or any other), trans kid issues have 0 to do with homosexuality outside the fact that's homosexual kids being the subject of teacher conversion therapy toward trans-ness.
Which btw is why more than one LGB group is completely against trans activitism wrt "trans care" in youth (then there are the heavy fights lesbians v trans activists).
Pls stop using the letter salad thing to purportedly depict a completely non existing unity of intent between totally different people who didn't elect letter salad associations as their political representatives
What are you claiming to be a 'natural phenomenon'? I would think the true figure in the past was also unnaturally suppressed. In any case, there are a ton of logical reasons you can point to to note an increase in young people who identify that actually exist. People are pointing to 'indoctrination' by educators with no actual examples. All it really takes is one example to bring an angry old to orgasm anyway
For clarity's sake it would als
Db,
these are the actual numbers.
So there has been a rise in lgbtq identification but most of it is bisexuals. The majority of young lgbt people in america are not gay, lesbian, and certainly not trans. Rather most of that increase is rising acceptance allowing people who are mostly straight to feel comfortable expressing some emotional or physical attraction to members of the same sex, ie bisexuality.
Pls stop using the letter salad thing to purportedly depict a completely non existing unity of intent between totally different people who didn't elect letter salad associations as their political representatives
I never said this, it is rather the right that lumps the lgbtq communities into weird arbitrary categories. No one knows more about the differences and cultural niches in those groups than the community themselves.
Also, it’s not a word salad because each letter has a definite and purposeful meaning. word salad means something confused and meaningless, not something concrete and accurate.
I never said this, it is rather the right that lumps the lgbtq communities into weird arbitrary categories. No one knows more about the differences and cultural niches in those groups than the community themselves.
Also, it’s not a word salad because each letter has a definite and purposeful meaning. word salad means something confused and meaningless, not something concrete and accurate.
It's a letter salad in fact, mixing things that have nothing to do with each other.
LGB is 3 things with something very specific in common: sexual preferences not shared by the majority of people, regarding sexes, which were discriminated against in the past often heavily.
All the rest is stuff that has nothing to do with sexual preferences rather with "how you feel about yourself" so why did that ever got mixed with LGB?
We know the answer is that LGB right groups won everything, so they should have dismantled because there was nothing else to do for them for the people they purportedly tried to represent, but too many people made a living through advocacy so they had to invent something to expand into.
We know the answer is that LGB right groups won everything, so they should have dismantled because there was nothing else to do for them for the people they purportedly tried to represent, but too many people made a living through advocacy so they had to invent something to expand into.
wow
