The costs of trans visibility

immigration detainees not criminals

but the key is, non citizens who the state did not trust to be unwatched while they decide what their fates will be

Ye so you are a biological man who wants to live as a woman, you illegal enter the USA and get free surgery. Great plan

USA USA USA USA USA USA

I'm not proposing any new standard. I don't know the minutia of how prison systems choose things like hospital networks or the flexibility in choosing specialists for prisoners with various medical issues. I'd guess it's pretty shitty deal for prisoners and that US for-profit prison systems working with US for-profit healthcare systems probably find a way to **** it up. Nevertheless, my basic view here is just that it is the state's responsibility to provide healthcare and that doesn't go away when someone is trans and has medical issues related to being trans. Presumably the overwhelming majority of that is going to be hormone therapies and counselling and the like, but I don't see any a priori reason that surgeries (on adults) should never be considered when the consensus of the medical team and patient is that this is the best medical course of action.

Somehow in Canada this seems easier to adjudicate, just give them the same access to the healthcare system that everyone gets in Canada (obviously not including medical tourism).

Its baffling the trans issue is such a big issue given all of the legitimate problems our country faces right now. I think Tucker said it best during his interview on the All In Pod (paraphrasing) that as our problems have gotten more insurmountable we have distracted ourselves by caring about these fringe issues that only affect a tiny number of people and really dont matter overall.

Trans is clearly the new medical scam now that pain clinics can no longer pump oxys to people, so now they target a new mental health issue to the tune of what, 20 billion a year in elective medical care that tries to get them as young as possible because then they have a customer for life. Are there some legitimate cases of trans, sure, I'll concede that I guess. But if you were born with xx chromosomes then youre a woman, xy then a man. The only people who claim trans should have some abnormality of their chromosomal pairs like xxy or w/e those very rare cases are.

The rule should be simple, once you're 18 you can have at it if you want. But until then, NO. And no you cannot transition so you can be placed in a womans prison. They can compete in a trans category for sports or what their chromosomes are if they want to compete in the mens/womens divisions.

To the LGB people , does it not piss you off that your movement has been hijacked by the T's and Q+? Just seems so far from the original mission of your movement, but maybe Ive got a bad read on the situation.

I have no idea why right wing media is so obsessed with trans issues and regularly people come here spewing anti-trans talking points when - as you suggest - there are so many more important issues you could have given a soliloquy on.

Yet here you are.

What a whiplash.

From "We are distracted by these non issues" to "Transism is clearly a medical scam to suppliment the oxy crackdown" in the moment of a line break.

Sounds like you are victim to the propaganda that makes you care a whole lot about something you shouldn't care about at all

You've got an awful read on read on the situation. Normal people don't get pissed off because a marginalized group is receiving social reform. That is how improvements get made.

I dunno, you pretend to "get it" then spew a bunch of awful / ignorant takes like a typical right wing chud

I'd never met any trans people until a couple of years ago-- both FTMs-- one who seemed fairly normal and adjusted and another with all sorts of issues who was sexually abused as a kid and hated herself. She's gone back to being a she and using her birth name now.

Another girl I know is a middle school guidance counselor in a small town in rural Missouri. She never had any trans students before and now she has three.

Because we think we can win on that (ie, polls are on the right side of those issues) and after you win on that you can generalize to other stuff.

Same as the left is obsessed with abortion. They can win on that, polls are clear, so they talk about it 24/7 even if it's insane to consider abortion as a top20 priority. But it works for them so they are smart to do that.

Female bodily autonomy is absolutely a top 20 priority for >50% of the population.

Its probably a top 5 priority for >50% of the population

Why do you translate abortion with "female bodily autonomy"? quite an orwellian semantic shenanigan. Only one state has legal prostitution lol, and i don't see the other 49 ones clamoring for it.

luciom, abortion is the #1 issue for a lot of people

i agree there's other issues such as famine/murder/unemployment/genocide to worry about but those are in the "what if" post apocalyptic scenarios we don't need to deal with so abortion is the most hardcore and visceral thing to deal with

there's also massive social factors at play, there's been a lot of studies that have linked the drop in crime rates in the united states with abortion as unwanted children will not grow up in stable families and then be more apt to grow up to become criminals

Prostitution is legal in 50 states under the guise of escorts / sugar babies.

Abortion is a bodily autonomy issue. There is no semantics or shenanigans. Like if vasectomies were to become illegal. Or if men weren't allowed to have tumors removed

I don't think it is, and you will see it in Florida in november, with quite more people voting in favor of abortion in their proposition about it (or whatever they call a prop in florida) vs how many of them will vote republican in the senate where Rick Scott is up again for election.

Rick scott confirmed a judge (ACB) that voted to reverse roe v wade and intends to do so again in the future if given the opportunity. If abortion was that #1 issue you woulnd't get a large gap between the 2 votes , ie her opponent would crush him with the same margin the abortion prop will win with (could still not pass the 60% threshold, but that's another topic).

People might talk about abortion at all but check voting records when you have that kind of differentiated sample

Abortion is 1 of hundreds of bodily autonomy issues (up to a point) and it's also a call on when a fetus (if ever) is a person.

But it's semantics , a rhetorical device, a synecdoche which hides the fact that those people don't care about "female body autonomy" in general almost ever, they care about one very specific and extremely limited in appication body autonomy topic.

i've been meaning to watch this actually

I can't think of any other female rights that were reduced or removed for them to care about like abortion

I think your second sentence is something you tell yourself so you can feel superior to people who care about abortion

I do care about free abortion (in the first trimester) with the proper priority , and with that about freedom (for women and men) more generally.

But i am really really really sure that my daughter would live better in say a country with ho hate speech laws and hard-to-get abortion, than in a country with a lot of state censorship, but easy access to abortion. And 30-40 topics like that.

ALSO BECAUSE, in dire cases, you take a ****ing plane to get a pill in a country (or state in the USA case) where it's legal. Abortion is something that you won't necessarily need all life long, and will need, if any, at most once or twice in your life.

And you get elsewhere.

So pragmatically it cannot matter more than the quality of your neighboorhood, inflation, censorship, or anything else that applies to your quality of life day in and day out.

If the WORST THAT CAN HAPPEN is you have to pay 1k or 2k and go to the beach in a foreign country for a weekend to take a pill to abort, how weird in your head do you need to be to consider it a priority ? just being taxed 1k less over 60k of income pays for that, in one year or two.

But there's a glaring difference between getting an abortion and getting a vasectomy. I think you can infer what that is.

Every aborted fetus had a father

See, you're framing abortion as essentially "female bodily autonomy." Bodily autonomy is an aspect of it. Pro-choicers regard that as paramount and pro-lifers regard the life of the embryo/fetus as paramount. Don't get me wrong, conservatives also use language to elevate their positions.

If it's problematic for old white dudes to legislate in favor of one side of the issue, then it's problematic for them to legislate the other. They either have a say or they don't. There are plenty of pro-life women and minorities out there as well who I'm sure are happy to have their support.

Yes, and every father can pump out as many babies in a day as their body could possibly allow which is the cornerstone of the asymmetry driving the debate and why women tend to get preferential treatment during conflicts involving children

Forcing a woman, who is saying "I can barely take care of myself how could I possibly take care of a child, to carry to term, then refusing to help feed, clothe, or house said baby doesn't exactly help the pro-life argument. They will go to ****ing war for the embryo then its thoughts and prayers for the child

The conversation was SPECIFICALLY about trans people disclosing not being able to have children. Do you know how to read? You seem to have a major problem interpreting the things I say even though nobody else here seems to have that problem.

this is one of the worst cases of bad faith arguing i've ever seen, i suggest you back to that game i suggested above

or maybe you'd like this one perhaps