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.
It's not that you simply mentioned that there was a time in the past when transgender was classified as a mental illness per se. Though claiming it was 5 years ago rather than 11 was deceptive. Posters refer to the fact that homosexuality was also considered a mental illness in the past.
But your "thought experiment" of going back in time was used as an obvious work around to the policy by using it as a construct to discuss the issue anyway
Understood.
Final question- “if your position cannot survive open discourse, your position is untenable and ultimately wrong” is a pretty standard belief, for a reason. Open societies used to hold this very dear. *
Why do you suppose the trans issue cannot withstand open discourse on 2+2 without “allowable speech rules” in place?
(* - this is not a ‘free speech’ argument and if that’s how anyone comprehended it, they’re dumb. 2+2 is allowed to curate speech however they wish )
Understood.
Final question- “if your position cannot survive open discourse, your position is untenable and ultimately wrong” is a pretty standard belief, for a reason. Open societies used to hold this very dear. *
Why do you suppose the trans issue cannot withstand open discourse on 2+2 without “allowable speech rules” in place?
(* - this is not a ‘free speech’ argument and if that’s how anyone compr
It's not a matter of withstanding open discourse. It's about establishing an environment where everyone can feel welcome to participate in our discussions. It is a decision that prioritizes respect for minority groups and not having to be exposed to being told they have a mental illness by their very existence when they read our forum.
Buddy, it is "transgender". One word. Please learn the basics terms.
But you are right that I am in the minority and expect to be in the minority. Trans people, as an oppressed minority in a fairly transphobic society that doesn't understand or accept them aren't going to be winning popularity contests, as has been the case for many minorities in the past. You don't win points by noting I hold minority views here!
I find Buddy offensive 😀
I thought I posted a reply but its gone
Trans gender, transgender, trannies what is the difference ?
Please stop with trans are an oppressed minority. We have bowed down to the trans community with separate washrooms, sports, laws against the wrong pronouns, education, healthcare . They are far from being oppressed
It would be pretty easy to dismiss many of the posters dogpiling on trans people as mentally unwell. Very easy pickings.
Not sure how that advances the discussion. I would guess most of you don't believe you are mentally ill even if others see evidence to the contrary
It would be pretty easy to dismiss many of the posters dogpiling on trans people as mentally unwell. Very easy pickings.
Not sure how that advances the discussion. I would guess most of you don't believe you are mentally ill even if others see evidence to the contrary
Everyone is mentally ill in their own way. (hopefully I'm allowed to say that)
i do think this is a situation where a group that sees itself as marginalized is doing what it can to increase its numbers and therefore power. i dont think the vast majority of these teachers are grooming kids for direct sex, but i do think they are doing the dirty work for the far left.
If it wasn't already tough enough bein a teacher; underpaid, underappreciated, unable to regulate your own classroom if kids are acting up.... but this. This is truly a truly evil position to propagate.
Understood.
Final question- “if your position cannot survive open discourse, your position is untenable and ultimately wrong” is a pretty standard belief, for a reason. Open societies used to hold this very dear.
No, they didn't. I'm sure that's a pleasant myth to believe, though!
Reactionary conservatives // imagining a mythical past when things were oh so wonderful; an iconic combination!
I find Buddy offensive 😀
I thought I posted a reply but its gone
Trans gender, transgender, trannies what is the difference ?
Please stop with trans are an oppressed minority. We have bowed down to the trans community with separate washrooms, sports, laws against the wrong pronouns, education, healthcare . They are far from being oppressed
The difference is one of those is considered a slur. Please stop using it.
From our guidelines:
Other prohibited posts include the use of slur terms such as tranny or transformers, among others to refer to either individual posters or transgender persons as a group.
Are you just making stuff up? I don't believe you've ever quoted a claim of mine that is disputed by a majority of the experts in the relevant field.
Pretty sure the majority of pediatricians worldwide are against giving puberty blockers to 11y old kids diagnosed with gender disphoria. Many of them (not sure if the absolute majority though) would also claim that a 11y old can't be gender disphoric to begin with.
If it wasn't already tough enough bein a teacher; underpaid, underappreciated, unable to regulate your own classroom if kids are acting up.... but this. This is truly a truly evil position to propagate.
Underpaid? Their wages per hour in the USA are pretty high compared to what you get with the same degree in the private sector, for many degrees. And their retirement plans are absurdly good, health coverage way over average as well.
Sure in a few states, especially for some degrees, wages are fairly low, but on average nationwide in the USA? lol
Even if this might be semantically true depending on some definitions/assumptions, if it is it is still pretty meaningless because if qualitatively everyone is in a cathegory, then it becomes a matter of quantity and thresholds of that quantity that become problematic enough to warrant a definition.
"everyone has suboptimal health", compared to the max possible perfection imaginable, is very probably true and completly useless as well.
Even if this might be semantically true depending on some definitions/assumptions, if it is it is still pretty meaningless because if qualitatively everyone is in a cathegory, then it becomes a matter of quantity and thresholds of that quantity that become problematic enough to warrant a definition.
"everyone has suboptimal health", compared to the max possible perfection imaginable, is very probably true and completly useless as well.
I'd go further than that - if mental illness is a deviation from normalcy, and normalcy is what most people exhibit, it's not mathematically possible for everyone to be mentally ill.
No the reason is freedom lol jfc. Like we allow to buy coke even if it's bad for health.
Then yes condom are also "good" in various context or can be framed as such. But that's not the reason why we "allow" their sale jfc.
The state doesn't "allow", everything is allowed unless specifically prohibited
you’ve spent many many posts literally saying the state shouldn’t allow puberty blockers or books.
In theory the first sentence could be correct. In reality in America and other places peoples private sex lives, what they wear, and birth control methods are all highly contested, and it’s so comically disingenuous to act as though you aren’t one of that kind of activist.
Pretty sure the majority of pediatricians worldwide are against giving puberty blockers to 11y old kids diagnosed with gender disphoria. Many of them (not sure if the absolute majority though) would also claim that a 11y old can't be gender disphoric to begin with.
Have I made a medical claim about 11 year olds ITT?
Even if this might be semantically true depending on some definitions/assumptions, if it is it is still pretty meaningless because if qualitatively everyone is in a cathegory, then it becomes a matter of quantity and thresholds of that quantity that become problematic enough to warrant a definition.
"everyone has suboptimal health", compared to the max possible perfection imaginable, is very probably true and completly useless as well.
Well I think there are conditions that we would all recognize as mental illness, and then there are conditions that are mental illnesses for political purposes, conditions that haven't yet been recognized as mental illness, and conditions that are currently recognized as mental illness that one day won't be. Not really too much rigor there and lots of abuse possible.
you’ve spent many many posts literally saying the state shouldn’t allow puberty blockers or books.
In theory the first sentence could be correct. In reality in America and other places peoples private sex lives, what they wear, and birth control methods are all highly contested, and it’s so comically disingenuous to act as though you aren’t one of that kind of activist.
Nope i spent many many posts saying the state shouldn't allow minors diagnosed with gender disphoria to get puberty blockers, and PUBLIC SCHOOLS shouldn't have pornographic books in school libraries.
Both are topic wrt minors which aren't allowed normal freedoms because incapable of fully deciding for themselves.
I never asked to ban books from any facility for adults at all (public or private), nor to block adult people from accessing any treatment they want to modify their body, if they pay for them without asking anything from taxpayers.
I actually wrote anyone (in a sane state of mind, conscious from the pov of the law, who can sign contracts and so on) should be allowed to consume any substance at all no exception. And self modify, or get his body self modified, as much as he wants.
I am an activist to protect minors from violence though, and leftist violence to minors recently is particularly repugnant, while in the past it was the clear opposite for a very long time.
It's about who has cultural power in society i guess, unfortunately that's often used to abuse children systematically. We can hope one day whomever has cultural power stops abusing minors, but that day hasn't come yet.
I had personally hoped that ended with churches losing most of their cultural power, but the new church of the letter soup is taking their place and doing the same to minors so i am here to do my part to reduce the damage the church of letter soup inflicts on kids.
///
It has been several decades since birth control "being contested" in the USA simply meant people refuse to pay for other people birth control, and that's perfectly fine and compatible with freedom.
I might have hallucinated your support for puberty blockers given to gender disphoric children.
If so i am sorry.
So are you , as the majority of worldwide experts are, fully against prescribing puberty blockers to kids who have been diagnosed as gender disphoric? if not, why do you have an opinion on an expert subject which differs from that of the majority of worldwide experts on the topic?
It has been several decades since birth control "being contested" in the USA simply meant people refuse to pay for other people birth control, and that's perfectly fine and compatible with freedom.
Nothing in your post disputes what I wrote, it just confirms it. Similarly there are people against giving condoms to minors because they think minors shouldn’t be having sex outside of marriage. The quoted portion is just wrong. Have you seen the news in regards to abortion?
