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.
Tin foil hatted paranoid Reds under the Bed rants. That figures. Must really suck to be this scared all the time.
Nope.
Again, the Frankfort School- and its tenets- isn’t a ‘conspiracy theory’.
You can say tin foil trope conspiracy canard and that might work for a little while as long as nobody bothers to google it but if they do Google it and look for themselves and see what it is, whats your position then?
Bobo,
what sort of legislation are you talking about? i don't keep up on this stuff all that great but if it's legislation saying anyone under 18 can't take hormones or get surgery than i think that's a pretty good idea and not targeting anyone.
That is the main gist of the legislation. Which, as I said, I see as "overreaching legislation to solve what they are portraying as a problem that could easily enough be figured out by experts in the field". My knowledge, and I suspect that of 99% of legislators, of issues like this is far, far less than that of actual professionals in the field (doctors, psychologists, counsellors). My knowledge, and I suspect that of 99.9% of legislators, of individual circumstances is far, far less than that of actual professionals and family supporting each individual. Legislation that outright bans any possibility of nuance when dealing with individual circumstances seems to me like a bad way to go. And it leads to results like...
Several bans proposed in 2023 would limit access to care for older youth up to age 26.
https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/p...
I'm quite sure there are some people who genuinely are only concerned that children are being harmed, and nothing more. I believe most of them are misinformed, but obviously I can't speak to what goes on in every jurisdiction in North America to know for certain there's never been an ill-advised procedure (in fact, I'd be surprised if there never had been). But a lot of the noisiest voices are from those with much more than that concern in mind IMO.
if its stuff like blacklisting/harassing etc trans adults then i do not support it. adults should be free to do what they want to but when it comes to such things as genital mutilation and/or medicine that changes the natural cycle of human growth than that stuff needs to be kept away from children.
Generally speaking, the laws aren't "blacklisting/harassing etc trans adults" directly. But they feed into what is currently a toxic climate for transgender people IMO. In my province in Canada, it's the same crowd that has an issue with transgender youth that comes out to school board meetings suggesting teachers are "grooming students", and are looking to have books banned. There is a segment of society that is quite happy to use the current "culture wars" to further their own varying agendas.
Bobo do you think books about anal masturbation should be in public high school libraries? Because those are the books normal people want to ban from schools, those are the books the activists introduced.
I am not sure I can link to the sources listing all the imagery found in the books put in libraries by groomers in American high school because it's really porn.
There was a court where parents who were asking to ban those books were forbidden from reading excerpts from the books themselves in open court lol, that's the kind of degenerate stuff we are talking about
Well how do you reconcile the fact that most gay marriages strengthens the concept of a nuclear family and is used to allow couples to create and foster children and build family units despite their sexuality, utilizing existing marital contract, tax and adoption laws? Seems anti-marxist to me.
Well how do you reconcile the fact that most gay marriages strengthens the concept of a nuclear family and is used to allow couples to create and foster children and build family units despite their sexuality, utilizing existing marital contract, tax and adoption laws? Seems anti-marxist to me.
2 homosexuals can't create life but nice try.
Adoption laws should be changed to allow single (and in general unmarried) individuals to adopt, that's another topic
That is the main gist of the legislation. Which, as I said, I see as "overreaching legislation to solve what they are portraying as a problem that could easily enough be figured out by experts in the field". My knowledge, and I suspect that of 99% of legislators, of issues like this is far, far less than that of actual professionals in the field (doctors, psychologists, counsellors). My knowledge, and I suspect that of 99.9% of legislators,
yeah, than i guess we just have to agree to disagree. to me it seems like common sense to restrict this sort of "healthcare" to actual adults.
this is what i mean by things being shoved down our throats. if you want to fight for your right to not be harassed, to have equal opportunities for jobs etc, that's fine and i support your efforts. pushing your agenda on children is quite another and the backlash is warranted.
yeah, than i guess we just have to agree to disagree. to me it seems like common sense to restrict this sort of "healthcare" to actual adults.
this is what i mean by things being shoved down our throats. if you want to fight for your right to not be harassed, to have equal opportunities for jobs etc, that's fine and i support your efforts. pushing your agenda on children is quite another and the backlash is warranted.
(And we should not cover it with taxpayer money as being trans is NOT a disease, science says, so it is not a medical matter)
Bobo do you think books about anal masturbation should be in public high school libraries? Because those are the books normal people want to ban from schools, those are the books the activists introduced.
uh, I'd think books about sex ed would be entirely reasonable. I remember learning what masturbation was in sex ed class in school, didn't you?
Regardless, I'd leave the judgement up to librarians and teachers, not right wing social warrior politicians.
uh, I'd think books about sex ed would be entirely reasonable. I remember learning what masturbation was in sex ed class in school, didn't you?
Regardless, I'd leave the judgement up to librarians and teachers, not right wing social warrior politicians.
Ye let's choose people who lean left 90%, conveniently.
We didn't have "sex Ed" in school ffs, never existed in Italy.
Anyway in your country, curricula are chosen by elected bodies if I am not mistaken (maybe only in some states?).
Why are you against democracy?
yeah, than i guess we just have to agree to disagree. to me it seems like common sense to restrict this sort of "healthcare" to actual adults.
Fair enough. Outside of what might be intended as scare quotes, I don't take big issue with this. I mean, I definitely don't agree (and have and will continue to argue against this), but I don't think it's radical or hateful for someone to feel this way.
this is what i mean by things being shoved down our throats. if you want to fight for your right to not be harassed, to have equal opportunities for jobs etc, that's fine and i support your efforts. pushing your agenda on children is quite another and the backlash is warranted.
This is where I think the real harm is happening. This idea that there is some hidden agenda being pushed on kids. That's not to say I don't see some radical statements made on the left that I think are counterproductive and go too far, but for the most part the agenda I see is people who care about kids and want to make sure transgender kids are protected and get what they need.
Bobo do you think books about anal masturbation should be in public high school libraries? Because those are the books normal people want to ban from schools, those are the books the activists introduced.
I am not sure I can link to the sources listing all the imagery found in the books put in libraries by groomers in American high school because it's really porn.
There was a court where parents who were asking to ban those books were forbidd
This is a little off-topic, but I guess I brought this up tangentially so I don't mind responding. What I've seen thus far in our schools I think is fine. Gender Queer is a great example of a book that given your post, I strongly suspect you'll have an issue with, but I know is in some of our school libraries. And do you know where else you'll find such material? Public libraries. On the Internet. I'd much prefer to have students getting that material from a school library where questions could be asked or even a bigger discussion had with a teacher librarian, than them trawling around the Internet to find it. Are there naked people, and sexual positions shown in some of those books? Yup, there sure are. Are they there for the purpose of sexual gratification? No, of course not, which is why they're not "really porn". Of course kids could use it that way, just like they could use a million things they find on the Internet without having to worry about a teacher or friend spotting them with a "naughty book". Hell, for a teenager an SI swimsuit issue is enough for that.
Anyway in your country, curricula are chosen by elected bodies if I am not mistaken (maybe only in some states?).
In Canada, where uke and I both are? Absolutely not. Educators decide what books are most suitable for education. Hopefully it's the same in the US, but I wouldn't be surprised if it varies greatly.
No sorry I meant the USA I remembered you (bobo) were Canadian, I wrongly assumed uke was american.
In the USA in many states there are school boards (elected ones) that have a wide range of curricular choices (including which books to put in school libraries) within county/state/federal limits
Canada also has elected school boards, which typically stay out of the business of curriculum. They still have overall authority and could get (and occasionally have gotten) involved in overriding curricular choices, but that tends to be poor governance.
It would seem times have changed.
https://www.bzga-whocc.de/en/sexuality-e...
Although maybe Italy is one of the 4/25 countries there that still don't have it.
This is a little off-topic, but I guess I brought this up tangentially so I don't mind responding. What I've seen thus far in our schools I think is fine. Gender Queer is a great example of a book that given your post, I strongly suspect you'll have an issue with, but I know is in some of our school libraries. And do you know where else you'll find such material? Public libraries. On the Internet. I'd much prefer to have students getting that material
Not off topic because those books are both porn, and trans activist books (trans activist language, and a strong focus on anal sex because that's something fairly independent of your genitalia I suppose so it can potentially apply to anyone, at least in their worldview).
I asked in the mod thread if I can put the sexually explicit pictures from the banned books so you will then determine if they are porn or not
Fair enough. Outside of what might be intended as scare quotes, I don't take big issue with this. I mean, I definitely don't agree (and have and will continue to argue against this), but I don't think it's radical or hateful for someone to feel this way.
This is where I think the real harm is happening. This idea that there is some hidden agenda being pushed on kids. That's not to say I don't see some radical statements made on the left tha
I think kids who think they are/identify as trans should be protected too. Meaning I don't think they should be harassed or anything of the sort. The medical stuff is where I draw the line. However, I also feel kids are most likely overprescribed other medicines as well, specifically for ADHD and the like.
We live in strange times and things kids worry about today I don't think crossed our minds as children. Such is the cost of technology I suppose.
It would seem times have changed.
https://www.bzga-whocc.de/en/sexuality-e...
Although maybe Italy is one of the 4/25 countries there that still don't have it.
I have 2 kids in school in Italy (11 and 8) and there is no sex ed.
I asked in the mod thread if I can put the sexually explicit pictures from the banned books so you will then determine if they are porn or not
These images aren't hard to find, but I'll tell you right now without seeing them that they're likely not "porn" because...
por·nog·ra·phy
/pôrˈnäɡrəfē/
noun
printed or visual material containing the explicit description or display of sexual organs or activity, intended to stimulate erotic rather than aesthetic or emotional feelings.
And yes, this is somewhat off-topic, or at least a bit tangential. It's slightly relevant, but I'm just saying I'm not going to waste 20 posts going back and forth with you on a debate about whether or not a book meets whatever your sensibilities tells you is porn.
Sorry to hear that.
I do think they are exactly intended to stimulate , not inform.
They want minors to be interested in "kinky stuff" as early as possible, because yes they are grooming them.
And in more and more places this is going to stop
LOL.
They want minors to be interested in "kinky stuff" as early as possible, because yes they are grooming them.
Sigh.
OK then.
Here, maybe this will help your case.
**NSFW**
I am not sure why you think it's proper for unelected experts to decide if those images are good or not for kids, instead of voters.
But you repeatedly deferred to experts in other cases as well so that's maybe your style in general.
LOL.
Sigh.
OK then.
Here, maybe this will help your case.
**NSFW**
sorry but those images are pornographic in nature. i am not surprised there is uproar at those being allowed in high schools, where some kids are 14.
When it comes to deciding what is good for kids I choose unelected experts over the general public 100 times out of 100.
sorry but those images are pornographic in nature. i am not surprised there is uproar at those being allowed in high schools, where some kids are 14.
It's incredible.
But I accept people can have ideas very different from mine, that's what democracy is about.
And we have to find a way to coexist.
What I don't accept is "well me and you profoundly disagree, so instead of counting how many people agree with me and how many with you, let make people who align with me politically (educators and the like are leftists in most countries much more than the population) decide everything".
When it comes to deciding what is good for kids I choose unelected experts over the general public 100 times out of 100.
If you do even after they mandated masks to the 3 years old in some areas of the USA in 2022, then I am really, really, really sorry but this is something i am willing to fight about.
Maybe a poor decision is made occasionally but I would still trust in experts over the general public to make decisions about what is best for health/education of kids as the vast, vast, vast majority of the time it will result in decisions that are in better for the children's long term interests rather than a result of uninformed reactionism. It's a complete no-brainer for me.
