Why does it seem most people, mainly conservatives, against Trans people? Unless I am wrong I never heard of one shooting up a school church or whatever. The ones I have met have been pretty cool.
1y 6mon ago by lemmy.world/u/Don_Dickle in nostupidquestionsBecause stirring up hate against vulnerable minorities, by positioning them as a threat is a well tested and effective technique for the power hungry to gain and retain power. And it's effective, because it works by pulling people in and making all of the conversation about whether or not it's right to hate on the group they're targeting.
The more I read these comments it sound like the USA is entering its Hitler phase.
They very much are...
Hell we used to genocide and enslave the people we looked down on. Talking ill of them on Fox News is a step up, my friend.
https://www.faena.com/aleph/umberto-eco-a-practical-list-for-identifying-fascists
In an essay published in the New York Review of Books, Umberto Eco distilled the 14 typical elements of “Ur-Fascism or Eternal Fascism,” while warning that, “These features cannot be organized into a system; many of them contradict each other and are also typical of other kinds of despotism or fanaticism. But it is enough that one of them be present to allow fascism to coagulate around it.”
-
The cult of tradition. “One has only to look at the syllabus of every fascist movement to find the major traditionalist thinkers. The Nazi gnosis was nourished by traditionalist, syncretistic, occult elements.”
-
The rejection of modernism. “The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense, Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.”
-
The cult of action for action’s sale. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.” Disagreement is treason. “The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture, the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge.”
-
Fear of difference. “The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.” Appeal to social frustration. “[…] one of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups.
-
The obsession with a plot. “The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia.”
-
The enemy is both weak and strong. “[…] the followers must be convinced that they can overwhelm the enemies. Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.”
-
Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. “For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle.”
-
Contempt for the weak. “Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology.”
-
Everybody is educated to become a hero. “in Ur-Fascist ideology, heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death.”
-
Machismo and Weaponry. “This is the origin of machismo (which implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality). Since even sex is a difficult game to play, the Ur-Fascist hero tends to play with weapons—doing so becomes an ersatz phallic exercise.”
-
Selective Populism. “There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.
-
Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. “All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning.”
A combination of 'scapegoat' and 'them vs us', basically.
It is also exceedingly important to note that plenty on the Right don't explicitly hate Trans people. That's a rhetoric. They may be worried about some of the news "reports" and """stories""", had to triple quote that one, and yes the radical Right and MAGA do buy in hard and hate due to racial and superiority bullshit. What so many on the Right who are on the fence about these things are truly scared of...
Is having an opinion that deviates from the people around them who they've known probably all their lives. Unlike us on the Left who hiss and spit at one another every time one of us has a family gathering, many on the Right fear alienating their social circles.
If you ever want to change the mind of someone on the Right you really just need to soothe their rabid, horrid, twisted by those around them, frothing soul of an angry jackass and make them feel as if they can actually believe something else could be the truth.
But by GOD can it be tiring.
Spot on. The fucking bathroom issue I keep hearing kills me. They are in there to take a shit Karen not to pass you brownies though the stalls and play a game of peak a boo above the stalls
I still don't understand their claims that bathroom segregation makes anyone "safer"
Do they think there's some kind of law on the books that says "Anyone who matches the gender on the sign can diddle anyone inside they want!" cause that's how they act.....
Personally I find it silly that bathrooms are segregated at all when stalls exist.
Personally I find it silly that bathrooms are segregated at all when stalls exist.
You mean the 3-foot particle board separator with a 2-foot gap at the bottom and a solid inch of space around the entire door, the gap large enough to make eye contact with someone at the sink while you're sitting with your pants down?
Because that's what passes for a "stall" in 99% of America. Privacy never even came into the conversation when they designed those damn things. They are designed to give the bare minimum illusion of privacy while still being easily stared through to make sure no one is doing drugs in your bathroom. At any point in time any employee of any company has a right to come into the bathroom, peer through the crack in the door and make sure you're in there dropping a dook properly and not say, shooting up heroin. And you can't stop them even if you wanted to, the stalls are designed to make that possible.
So, with that knowledge, I sort of almost understand the people that get all up in arms about this. Because there is almost NO expectation of privacy in ANY American public bathroom. If we had European style stalls this would never have been a problem in the first place. But because anybody can just walk up and literally make eye contact from outside the stall while you've got your pants down, some folks can be understandably concerned about that.
That doesn't excuse any of this mess and it doesn't make them correct, but non-americans don't realize how shoddy our typical public restroom is. The anger at trans folks should instead be directed at the cheap-ass building contractors that mandate bathrooms that don't give you privacy.
Edit: These are what I'm used to seeing.

If you're tall, your eye level is over the top of that door. If you're a young kid, the bottom of the door doesn't even start until your chest or shoulders. If you're medium height the gap around the door is your peephole, whether you want it to be or not.
As someone who grew up in a conservative household in a deep red state, I think that part of it is that a lot of people are letting Lizard Brain dictate their response to transgender people.
Let me give you a personal example. A while back, I went to a social dance, and there was a trans woman there. Before the dance starts proper, the couple that runs it will teach a dance lesson, and we rotate partners while that's going on. Eventually, I was rotated into being her partner. For some background, she was obviously early on in her transition; she still looked like a dude in a dress, she didn't quite have the appearance down yet. But she gets huge props for not only having the bravery to go out as herself, but doing it in fucking Arkansas.
So I rotate over to her, and it dawns on me that she's trans. In my head, Lizard Brain immediately starts screaming. "WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS?! THIS PERSON IS OBVIOUSLY A DUDE IN A DRESS, HE MUST BE UP TO SOMETHING IF HE'S DRESSING AS SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN WHAT HE IS! RABBLERABBLERABBLERABBLERABBLE"
Keep in mind, where I grew up, you just didn't see trans people, and even now, it still tickles that primal part of my brain that was trained to be uncomfortable around people who aren't white and straight.
The difference between me and many of the people I grew up around is that I recognize that it's happening and try to tone Lizard Brain out when it starts screaming. A lot of other people listen to it and don't care that the person that it's screaming about is exactly that: a person.
A brave, vulnerably nuanced answer. Suspicious... what are you planning?
This is so real. It takes a LOT of effort and time to train this out. If someone isn't willing to go through that then it makes sense that it would fester.
I had lots of times when i was younger learning about queer culture when i got mad at things. Especially after an overly polite and patient person took the time and effort to explain something to me. Unlearning hate is painful. Learning to liberate yourself is painful.
I think a lot of people feel that pain and decide to run from it and double down on the hate because that way they don't need to learn and change or pry open their mind to an alternative.
Then there's the whole fear of conflicting with your own community as a factor.
Would you mind sharing what that person explained to you?
Many conversations with many different people. I can't recall as this was mostly a decade ago, before it all clicked for me that humans are diverse and nuanced and it's fine. My guess would be pronouns and wide net incel stuff. Not that i was particularly bad but deprogramming a Catholic suburban upbringing in american masculinity culture and propaganda is a monumental feat.
I think the fact that i was willing to listen, think critically, and engage in self doubt is what invited the conversations. Still, they were being very charitable with their energy and time.
I'm really grateful for that, especially after recognizing in not as cishet as i thought i was.
Excellently said!
The only thing I have an issue with, and it's a small issue at that, is:
Keep in mind, where I grew up, you just didn't see trans people,
You most assuredly did see them. You just didn't realize it because they were forced to hide who they really were.
What happened next? How was the dance? Don't leave us hanging!
I remember reading that when people have racist reactions like what you're describing it's like a different part of their brain triggers and then their frontal lobe (for higher logic) sort of suppresses it. I really wish I could remember more about this but I definitely remember learning about this in psychology. Something like when a baby sees someone of a skin color they haven't seen before they get nervous, but when they're older different parts shut it down. The memory is very fuzzy.
For a simple example: my mother is Catholic and until Trump came along, a lifelong single-issue Republican voter who always said she would be a Democrat if it weren't for abortion. She attends church in an extremely progressive, famously LGBTQ-friendly town.
There's a transwoman who attends her church (let's call her Rita). This lady is probably in her mid-50s to mid-60s and has been a fixture at the church for at least 5 years. My mom has been in choir and bible study groups with her for years now. She still just can't see Rita as a woman. Treats her politely but behind her back refuses to call her "she" and says she's a "man in a dress".
She's really offended that Rita uses the ladies' room. I've asked her why and she can't articulate it, she just feels like it's an invasion of her privacy, because men don't belong in the ladies' room. And when I point out that Rita isn't a man, she just rolls her eyes. I've asked her if she's worried that Rita is in there for predatory purposes and she admits that she doesn't think Rita intends any harm. I've asked her how she'd feel if she were forced to use the men's room and she says "but that's different!"
My mom prides herself in being a moral person, and still can't manage to get past her bigotry to see Rita as a woman. There are just too many mental blockades against it. But since she thinks she's so highly moral, she thinks she must be correct in this situation. It excuses her from finding empathy and bettering her attitude toward trans folks.
My longwinded point is that when people who consider themselves highly moral are bigoted, there's almost zero chance of getting through to them. And I think a lot of the people who are bigoted against trans folks feel that morality is on their side and being trans is morally deviant, so they think they're justified in their prejudice.
That's been my similar experience with the Zionist Jews in my family.
It's strange to them.
When people encounter something that's different from what they are used to, they don't know how to process it. It makes them uncomfortable. Some people, instead of learning how to deal with that feeling like a mature adult, blame the individual for making them feel uncomfortable and resent them for "making them feel that way". Just staying away is not enough, they must be punished for existing.
All because someone felt a little icky when they thought about a girl with a weiner.
well yeah they don't like the thought of a girl with a weiner, you can't degrade and classify women into being just a hole+reproductive organs if they might not have that. (but also pre-op trans dudes can't use women's bathrooms cus they aren't women but still will never be men???) bigots are bigots.
This is really it. They feel strange about it and cannot grok it. It's bizzarre that it can break even people that I hold in high regard.
For instance Graham Linehan, the brilliant writer of Father Ted, Black Books and The IT Crowd went completely of the rails like his own father Jack when it came to transgender people. There's people who just cant cope. Even including LGBT+ people. Theres plenty of gay people that hate transgenders with a passion and fail to see that the very same hate was directed at themselves a generation before.
It boggles the mind. But really people feel really icky about the fact that people can choose their gender when they are being plagued by being welded to that gender in most of their lives.
Even as someone who fully accepts trans people and has trans friends and family, it’s still an adjustment to some really old, deeply-seated habits and mental structures. I’m over 50 so I was set in my ways when I learned about “they” pronouns and it still takes work for me to get it right. If I didn’t care about the people involved, it would be very easy to see it as a burden or annoyance.
I'm a southerner. Take what I'm about to tell you as close to the grain of the problem as possible, because it is.
Here's the thing. 9 times out of 10, a Southern man is going to meet a lone trans or gay person, have a pleasant experience talking to them and go about their day, they even make friends with the person, spend years talking to them, send gifts, become family members, etc.
But you know what?
Behind closed doors, it's "fuck those trannies", "not in my schools", etc. My mom does it, her sister does it, my dad did it. It's hypocrisy at an extreme level while also ignoring it at an extreme level.
"Well I have gay friends... I'm not homowhatzit"
THEY'RE TEACHING WHAT!?
"Double Standard" might as well be the tagline for the entire South. They'll protect their religion and the expectations put on them by their parents and social norms on a general level across the board, while still shaking hands and eating cake with their lgbtq+ buddies.
Just remember any southerner is one thought from God away from stabbing you in the back at all times, because no matter how close you get to them, even as a family member, that book and the expectations behind it means more, was beat into them more, every day since they were born until you met them.
I thought this was pretty universally known in the US because I'm not from the US and never been further south than NYC when I did visit, but even I have seen it in some movie and immediately picked it up based on the tone and connect. I mean it was pretty much "he said something incredibly stupid" -> "oh bless his heart" between some southern grandmas
Might've been Big Mommas House, might've been something else entirely.
Southerner here and I'll say you were right, up until your last paragraph.
Just remember any southerner is one thought from God away from stabbing you in the back at all times
This part however, is bullshit.
We're not all the same and that you would suggest so actually pisses me off. Replace the word "southerner" in that sentence with any other group of people and see if you still find it acceptable.
Fucking lol at hateful idiots stereotyping an entire geographic area. I'm sure in their minds it's completely different than stereotyping people because of their race/creed/gender/whatever.
I lived with them long enough that the shadow of a doubt has its own lamp. I've heard racist and misogynist shit from people I've known for a decade or more who never had a sign of it before.
Yep, I'm set with it. Fuck em. Worth it.
Yeah that's called "prejudice" and isnt a good quality.
Swap "southern" for "black" or "gay" and see if you'd be proud to make that same claim.
I'll be goddamn. I've seen family members ousted from a dinner table, in my own fucking family.
Maybe in your pampered version of the South.
In mine, they leave and never come back or speak to you again and all the old folks wonder why, while forgetting the last 60 family get togethers' arguments.
"Pampered version of the South" lol I grew up in Bum-Fuck, Florida and have lived in various southern cities as well as spending much of my youth in random rural areas.
Racists and pieces of shit exist everywhere and I'm not denying that. Your blanket statement regarding all southerners is where I take issue.
Don't forget you said you were a southerner yourself, so am I to expect God will speak to you at any moment and turn you into an even more prejudiced person or...? Because if that's a true statement, which it isn't, you're saying you yourself should never be trusted. And if that's the case, why should we listen to what you, who is just another Southern, backstabbing, secret Bible thumping, homophobic, racist (accordng to your own flawed statement) have to say anyway?
Incorrect. The book itself means very little, just their interpretation.
100%
My mom went to an integrated school in the South, made friends... but sometimes overheard racist slurs and threats behind closed doors. Same story with family I have now, all pleasent in public, friends with some gay family members. But vehemently anti-vaccine and such behind closed doors... I have horrible stories I can't even repeat.
The duality is unreal.
A question is where that behind-doors comes from... a lot is from church. Church like you've never seen if you haven't been to the South.
Materialist answer (inspired by a video called Why The Political Compass is Wrong: Establishing An Accurate Model of Political Ideology, by breadtuber Halim Alrah... and also Jane Elliott's famous experiment)
Business owner makes money by paying workers to produce widgets at $6 / unit. Owner sells these widgets at $10 / unit, making a $4 profit each sale.
Before long, the workers catch on to the reality of the situation: the owner could be making a lot less and still be able to provide "leadership" (or whatever it is he provides). They decide not to work for less than... $8 per unit. With this price, the owner will still be wealthy (the business makes hundreds of widgets, after all). But now, so will the workers.
So the workers save up money and use it to go on strike.
However: business owner comes up with a better solution to the problem: he divides the workers into brown-eyed workers and blue-eyed workers. He then uses his money to discriminate against the brown-eyed workers. His cronies in government make it legal to deny brown-eyed workers jobs and housing. His cronies in the media write hysterical anecdotal stories about various brown-eyed rapists, thieves, and murderers.
Terrified mobs -- stoked into a frenzy by the business owner's well-funded propaganda -- tear down brown-eyed people's homes and food supplies, leaving them destitute before the strike is done.
The brown-eyed workers now must choose between returning to work for the business owner at $5 / unit... or starving to death.
The blue-eyed workers, meanwhile, have just been tricked into betraying their own team. Some were not tricked, but simply unprepared. These unprepared workers stood by in either shock, uncertainty, or laziness, unable to comprehend how their fellow blue-eyed workers could have become so foolishly self-defeating and cruel.
But now the business owner can put up the illusion of no longer needing the blue-eyed workers. He can run his factory on a skeleton crew of desperate, brown-eyed workers, and say to the blue, "uh oh! Looks like the brown-eyed workers just stole your jobs!"
Much like the brown-eyed workers, the blue-eyed workers have a restricted set of choices: A) admit they were suckers --fooled into attacking their own team -- and try to apologize and rebuild their union, B) double down and blame brown-eyed people for undercutting them... but reluctantly return to work, because the strike is broken, or C) just like the brown-eyed workers, they can choose to starve to death.
(A) will be the most difficult. As Mark Twain said: "it's easier to fool people than convince them they have been fooled."
The business owner wins, and now society has an eye-color-discrimination problem. Eye color was an arbitrary characteristic. Yet now it decides where someone lives, who they spend time with, and what kinds of opportunities they have access to.
The business owner can rinse and repeat for: skin tone, religion, country of origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, etc. As the saying goes,
"Divide and conquer."
You asked why trans people are currently the subject of fear and hysteria? No reason. Not any new reason at least. Trans people are different. Any and every difference between workers is an opportunity for those fatcats rich enough to own "The Daily Mail" and the "The New York Post" to separate us into camps and drain us dry, one camp at a time.
I find this disingenuous, infantilizing. Racial discrimination and warring has been happening since the beginning of (recorded) time. It stems, among many, many other things (this thing is incredibly complex), from the fear of the other's "unknowns", a somewhat justified fear of others, given humanity's penchant for conquering the neighbors. Another factor is the use of each own's feeling of superiority over the other's, to cover for one's underlying fear of inferiority in some way. Take the example (one of many, not singling out here) of the Jews assertion that they are god's chosen people, thus everyone else being inferior.
While divide and conquer has been used since the dawn of time, and adapted by the capitalists, the sad and simple fact is that people fear that which doesn't conform to their comfortable life scheme, that people want certainty, and having a "different" is unsettling for many, and demonization is an easy way to prop one's belief structure. People who exchange critical thinking for a "safe" belief structure, find it threatening to have others challenge that, so they fight back, to try to have that attack defeated. This can be exploited by others, to rally against that perceived common enemy. Wave a flag, and all who have a common belief of that flag representing their values will rally.
People don't want to think, and/or challenge their beliefs. It's a comfort thing.
I like your answer too. While I strongly believe the trans talking point is being amplified almost exclusively to fuel culture wars between the working class, your point on out-group mentality is a DNA encoded reality, from what I remember reading.
I think the two compromise the bulk of the answer along with the culture war fuel dumped by foreign entities interested in destabilizing the US.
The only remedy is education. Something that is sadly on the decline.
Really well articulated.
Thanks!
Incredible answer! I saved this with my running list of great quotes and passages.
Thank you!
Because fascists need a scary other to scapegoat to erode everyone’s rights.
I think most commenters here are missing the point.
There is a more extreme reaction to transgender people as opposed to gay or lesbian people, because of issues like sports and bathrooms. And that hits at people's sense of injustice. For example if you have a young daughter, a lot of people will hate the idea of a person with a penis going into the women's room and being around their little girl. Or if that daughter grows up and joins a sports team, the idea of somebody who is hormonally male and thus naturally more muscular competing against your daughter is unpleasant.
Put differently, I think a lot of people we now classify as 'transphobic' don't actually have much problem with trans people themselves. Rather, with how the efforts to ensure trans people receive the full treatment of their chosen gender can affect the rest of society.
For me personally, I don't know what the answer is. I generally don't care which bathroom you use as long as you wash your hands. I have no problem with anyone presenting themselves to the world as whatever they wish, if it makes you happier than by all means.
At the same time though, I don't think it's transphobic to point out that somebody who is largely or entirely biologically male will have a natural competitive advantage in the field of sports.
So while I certainly don't want to exclude anybody, I think there is at least a little justification for restricting some women's sports to those who are genetically female.
It's artificial boosting of the same bigotry that's been ongoing for generations. The new part switching the target.
See, there's been a very concerted effort to radicalize the right wing of the American populace by media oligarchs. It's part of an overall strategy going back to at least the post-nixon era.
Want to crush black people? Find a way to villainize them indirectly. "Inner city" crime. Step up arrests for things that are disproportionately a part of black people's lives. Spread drugs into the chaos brought about by destabilizing black communities to engender greater violence between gangs. And it worked. Look at how many black people are in jail compared to pretty much any other group.
Go back to Stonewall, when the biggest movements for gay rights got going hard, and remember that trans people were involved from the beginning, but didn't have a convenient label, they didn't have a way to be a distinct group. Gay rights efforts worked to some degree. Enough that the far right plans to use gay people as the enemy had to find another target the same way that they had to change targets from black people to Hispanic people in the form of "illegal aliens".
When your plan rests on fomenting anger, hate, and fear to stir up the lowest common denominator of a populace you have to have a target, ideally more than one since there's always going to be gaps where your desired audience will fall prey to the manipulation for one hate focus, but not another, like when you run into conservatives that aren't actually racist, but hate anyone in the LGBTQ+ umbrella because of religion, or sheer stupidity.
So, when gays weren't a useful target for hate any more because enough people knew gay people, and there were enough gay people of prominence to make it harder, why not switch to the next best thing? Trans people!
See, we had a major shift in awareness of trans issues back in the late nineties and early naughties. That's was followed by a large shift in trans people now having a serious chance at transitioning as medicine advanced, funding shifted, and there was just enough support that more people could transition and not be alone.
This meant that the assholes pushing their agenda to gain and maintain both wealth and power had a gift given to them. A new label to attack, using the exact same rhetoric they'd been using against gay people. "It's unnatural", "but what about the children?", along with the ability to use lingering misogyny via to attack trans women in specific since they are now women, but used to be men (in the rhetoric), so they must be groomers sneaking into bathrooms.
It's the exact same bullshit over again.
People have forgotten that the same methodology has been in place every time people in power needed to scare the populace enough to achieve a goal. Remember reefer madness? Before my time, but the entire thing was built in order to continue the oppression of black people, to keep them firmly under the boot.
Go back further, and it was the Irish, the Chinese, the Italians, whatever group was "other" at the time.
But the modern version is so directly a rehash of the anti gay rhetoric that's not even fifty years in the past that I'm amazed it isn't glaringly obvious even to the people that have jumped on the bandwagon of both.
I've said it before, but people are stupid. They're easy to manipulate, easy to fool, and that's the majority. Even the ones that aren't easy to manipulate can still fall prey to it if they aren't paying attention. People are also lazy, and have little long term thinking ability, or attention spans. That's why we got zero lasting changes after George Floyd was murdered. Anyone that's made it this far, think for a second. How long did it take you to remember that name and what it means? Now, ask yourself how many people didn't remember at all.
That's why trans hate is working. People suck. The vast majority are easy to control, and will believe anything fed to them with the right language behind it. It just so happens that while all of the distractions being used to build up the hate also created a smoke screen to hide gerrymandering, which ends up with more and more control over what language is being used everywhere.
So, here we are with a manufactured, strawman enemy being propped up as the target and then painted with the word "trans". None of the bullshit used to build up the hate is true, it isn't accurate, and most of the people behind the hate actually know it's bullshit, but they aren't allowed to hate the blacks and the gays out loud any more. They can't just scream the n word or call people removeds at whim the way they used to.
So, now they've got trans people to hate. And they want that hate because it means they don't have to look at themselves, their own lives and choices. They don't have to stop and think that maybe everything they've built their identity around is empty, so they scream about "wokeness" and "transgenderism" as code words.
There's no serious, legitimate arguments against trans people being allowed to have the full protection of the law, to have full medical access, to have whatever gender they want on their driver's license. There's just the bullshit excuses to have someone to hate. There's not even a good argument about bathrooms, they're all built on bullshit too, and that's the one that's the low hanging fruit because it seems reasonable to people that aren't buying all the bullshit immediately, but aren't quite bright enough to think it through all the way on their own. Which, again, that's the majority, stupid people too drowned in lies and manipulation to bother thinking.
So, Don, if you've gotten this far, I know I went wide of what you asked, but it really is all related. It all comes down to the same thing in different faces over time.
For anyone else, I know this got a little ranty in parts. I know it is long enough to look a little crazed. IDGAF. This shit is patently obvious, it's not even a secret. The people that have been running the right wing of things for my entire lifetime and before have outright and publicly talked about it. One part of it, the "southern strategy" they brag about. It's infuriating, so I get ranty.
Please continue with your rants then, that was the most clear and concise breakdown of events I’ve ever seen. Thank you for writing it up
This is the correct answer. If anyone is interested in more, here are a couple of relevant articles.
https://www.npr.org/2024/05/06/1249406353/transgender-bathroom-bill-republican-states
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2023/03/anti-trans-transgender-health-care-ban-legislation-bill-minors-children-lgbtq/
things that are a part of a black person's life
Crime is just a part of a black person's life? That's a highly racist thing to say. Black people aren't inherently criminals.
Are you fucking joking?
If that's really where you thought I was going with that, you're the racist.
If you're trying to troll, good job because now I think you're either a troll, a racist, or an idiot. I prefer to think you're a troll.
No, I believe it's wrong to automatically classify black people or poor people as criminals. Yet so many people do it.
Since that was what I said, just phrased differently, maybe you can see how it looks like you're trolling.
Maybe also notice that you're the only one that took it that way.
I'm not trolling. I don't believe that anyone who is poor or a minority is automatically a criminal.
Dude, bugger off with this shit
I never said that, and you know I never said it
You literally said that black people get arrested for things that are a part of a black person's life.
Committing crimes is NOT automatically part of a black person's life. People CHOOSE to commit crime.
Yeah, you're putting words in his mouth. You misread, or misunderstood, but you're way off the mark
Then you shouldn't have said what you did if you didn't want people to call out your racism.
You're talking to the wrong person with that. The comment you responded to was from a different user. Check the user names.
And I'm fairly certain at this point that the other user is right, you're either trolling or mentally disturbed
It's not being mentally disturbed to be against racism.
It is to keep repeating the same thing over and over despite it being patently absurd
Racism is absurd. This is why I'm against it.
Fascists are cowards who attack the most vulnerable people as a standard tactic.
And after they exterminate one group, they move onto another
They came for the trans ~~and I did nothing, because I am not trans ~~ and I fought back where I could. Because fuck that shit, we know there this dance will end otherwise!
Right! They literally came for trans and disabled people before they came for the socialists and only then the trade unionists.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-forgotten-history-of-the-worlds-first-trans-clinic/
It is a self-cannibalizing ideology that destroys any society that fails to pull up the roots of those fascistic weeds
You all are overthinking it way too much.
Most people hate anything that's different or uncommon to themselves and their "world".
Simple as that.
It's heterophobia in the semantic sense of the word "fear of anything that's different".
Xenophobia
I always thought that xenos was more refering to people from outside, like physically from a different place.
But I really know nothing about words, greek, latin or whatever. So it will probably be a better choice of words.
That’s heresy.
Sigh, I'll get the holy promethium...
"other; different in origin." is the meaning of xeno.
So.. it kinda fits, it kinda doesn't.
Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.
Far simpler than whateveryone else is saying. The best way to rally humans to your side is to give them a common enemy. So conservative politicians picked enemies that are small in number and told everyone how they are to blame for all that is wrong in the world.
Times are hard? Our existing economic systems are perfect. It’s [insert minority here] who caused this. Quick, give me all the power so I can stop them.
They're going to use the bathroom and play sports. KILL THEM ALL!
Conservatives come in two types. The rich ones who want more and more money. And the poor ones who also want more money but are unable to obtain it because the rich hoard money.
The rich conservatives need to stop the poor conservatives from realizing the rich are why the poor can’t get money. So they make up vulnerable groups to blame for the poor’s problem, and the poor are generally too poorly educated to catch on to this game.
Different groups have been the scapegoat. Women, blacks, the italians, the irish, asians, gays, and now it’s transgender people.
The good news is transgender people WILL get full rights in about 20-30 years if you look at historical cycles. The bad news is it will be a fight and many will die before they get treated as human beings by these asshole conservatives.
I think earth’s current environment is going to collapse in 20-30 years.
True egalitarianism
They are just propagandized. In general, it's so much like racists - they may know trans people and just think they are the exceptions, like them as individuals and still think they hate them as a group. They are intentionally riled up by being forced fed edge cases and disinformation.
Trans people are just people. They aren't angels who are never criminals and they aren't degenerates who are always criminal, they are a diverse group like all of us are. But you can bet your ass that whenever a trans person does something criminal it will be blown up so big in conservative media and used to paint them all as criminals. It's just the right wing media machine.
How to say it delicately.. Many conservative/religious men really, truly want to just impale their throats on lady dick, but they are indoctrinated from birth to believe that a zombie from space (who they agree watches them shower and have sex) will be mad at them if they do what makes them happy. So to distract themselves from that always burning urge to ravenously aspirate dong nog, they performatively hate things as a hobby to pass the time until they die - profoundly alone and completely unhappy (see Lindsey Graham)
And then the conservative women are taught that they are stupid, useless furniture pieces there to look pretty and parrot - not capable of an opinion outside of the one provided by their husband or father.
🤣🤣
This is so on the nose, I love it.
As a male who quite enjoys having said orface impaled by (lady) dick. These folks need to start enjoying life instead of hating it and dragging everyone else down with them.
Ravenously asperate dong nog
Brother, your killing me here, this is epic.
I heard PregNog before, but it had me rolling.
I can't blame the attraction, but for real it's sad they hold back the world bc of their need to categorize the world according to sky daddy. What's worse is the women who support the indoctrination, I really hoped my sister would "see the light" as an adult but she's following the zombie's footsteps as prescribed.
I really hope this is sarcasm
We all see you. Isn't enough praying in the world to make that fire in you burn out...
They’re an easy minority to scapegoat. In the US they make up between 0.5% and 1.6% of the population. A sizable portion of straight people associate being transgender as something sick and weird and a sexual deviancy, so it’s easy to target them and to try to associate them with actual objectively bad things (ie pedophilia). They’re just people trying to find their place in the world and live their lives, same as most of us.
A sizable portion of straight people associate being transgender as something sick and weird and a sexual deviancy, so it’s easy to target them and to try to associate them with actual objectively bad things (ie pedophilia).
I find that disgusting and totally incorrect, but actually I would be fine if that's what they thought and that's where they stopped.
But they want to pass laws telling other people how they have to behave, and how they have to do things.
The most unamerican and unpatriotic, anti-freedom thing that I can possibly think of, is people passing laws to define something as intimate and personal as gender identity and family planning. Like can't they just fuck off and let people be how they want?
It's extremely weird. And these fucking bigots think because they won the election they're not weird anymore, but most of the country did not vote. These people are still weird as fuck. If everyone voted they would get crushed and laughed out of town.
They got like 1–2% more votes than Harris got and only got ~1 million votes over 2020. Had Harris gotten the same number of votes as Biden she would’ve won. It’s not that the country went more Conservative, it’s that Democrat voters are unreliable and failed to come out. There’s hardly a “mandate” to speak of, these people are still weird as shit, nothing changed.
I'm going to get all sorts of fun responses for trying to empathize with those with whom I disagree (instead of just writing "dumb bigots") but here goes:
First, remember that even gay marriage is fairly new to America, it's been around for less time than the MCU.
There are a lot of folks who almost have mental whiplash, gay marriage went from illegal to "you could get fired for being vocally uncomfortable about it" in fairly quick order.
Now, to make things even more wild for those folks, mainstream culture is pretty insistent that gender isn't even a thing anymore. Add in some pretty wild news stories/videos*, worries for their kids and the notion that the Left refuses to say there might be any issues whatsoever and you can kinda see where a backlash could crop up.
- eg: trans women being reassigned to women's prisons and then assaulting the women etc, a 6"2, 220lb woman practically murdering her handball oppoisition, some fairly sketchy research practices by some of the authorities (WPATH) on the subject etc.
This aligns with what I have heard from folks I know in that world. Fear motivated by exaggerating one off and isolated incidents. The information silos in the conservative world (especially news) is frightening.
You were doing reasonably well, until you diverted to pure transphobia in the last paragraph
The listing of the news/videos they may have seen?
Not the list, but the way you described them, as if these were things that actually happen...
This is part of the thing. If we on the Left can't have an honest discussion about things that do happen, then it is incredibly hard for anyone not already "on side" to take us seriously.
trans women being reassigned to women’s prisons and then assaulting the women etc https://www.economist.com/united-states/2024/09/26/americas-growing-row-over-policies-for-transgender-prisoners"Tremaine Carroll, a transferred inmate serving 25 years to life for violent crimes, was charged with raping two women in ccwf and faces trial soon; Carroll denies the charges. In 2022 an inmate moved to Rikers Island women’s prison in New York received a seven-year sentence for attempted rape."
This is a tricky issue, trans women in men's prisons are also at risk. But to straight up deny these things happen and deny the existence of non transphobic concerns, well, that's hard to take seriously.
a 6"2, 220lb woman practically murdering her handball oppoisition
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SJYdXj7Kac&ab_channel=WilsonB9000
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannah_Mouncey
Murder was hyperbole, probably inappropriate. But damn, she is just so much bigger than her entire team and everyone on the opposition in all of those clips. (She also dominates in Aussie rules football.)
some fairly sketchy research practices by some of the authorities (WPATH) on the subject https://www.economist.com/united-states/2024/06/27/research-into-trans-medicine-has-been-manipulated
The whole article is discomforting and worth reading. But, while WPATH (what is supposed to, and claims to be and independent science based organization) was creating their guidelines: "But an email in October 2020 from WPATH figures, including its incoming president at the time, Walter Bouman, to the working group on guidelines, made clear what sort of science WPATH did (and did not) want published. Research must be “thoroughly scrutinised and reviewed to ensure that publication does not negatively affect the provision of transgender health care in the broadest sense,” it stated. Mr Bouman and one other coauthor of that email have been named to a World Health Organisation advisory board tasked with developing best practices for transgender medicine."
Again, I'm generally on board with trans rights etc but to say there aren't issues just makes it that much harder to take us at face value.
This is a tricky issue, trans women in men's prisons are also at risk
"Also at risk"
The fact that you equate cherry picked single instance anecdotes as comparable to entrenched violence and discrimination against trans folk as being somehow comparable is the part that makes it transphobia.
Murder was hyperbole
It was, yeah. Despite her "murdering" the opposition, from the very article you linked, Australia finished 5th.
There are 7 players on a handball team. She scored 23 goals across 6 games, for an average of just under 4 goals per game (3.83 to be specific).
The total goals scored by Australia in those games was 160, which works out to an average of 3.81 per Australian player across those 6 games. Her "murdering" of her opponents consisted of having a 0.02% higher average than her team mates.
The fact that you parrot lines like "murdering" and look at videos designed to make it look open and shut, whilst not bothering to investigate the reality of the situation is what makes it transphobic.
The whole article is discomforting and worth reading. But, while WPATH (what is supposed to, and claims to be and independent science based organization) was creating their guidelines:
An article posted on the economist, who has Helen Joyce, a vocally transphobic journalist as one of their senior staff. Linking to an article that has been mostly circulated on various transphobic websites, calling out WPATH for being biased and getting in the way of evidence based research? Whilst defending the Cass review, which has been widely called out by many international medical bodies for its own bias and inconsistent approach to evidence.
The fact that you're worried about WPATH as the real issue here is telling...
You are misunderstanding.
Most reasonable, casual folks, who aren't up on who Helen Joyce is or other trans poli sco lore, these are all fairly reasonable takes. The Economist is generally regarded as one of the most reputable papers around and for good reason.
I've also not presented my beliefs, just "here's some pretty mainstream concerns." I made that pretty clear in my opening statement (and pointed out that pretty much this exactly would happen.)
You've clearly encountered these arguments before (definitely didn't watch the video which is fucking sympathetic). I'm not making these arguments.
I'm saying that reasonable people, who read one of the most reputable papers in the world can in fact have reservations on some trans issues. I can disagree with them but it's not just bigotry.
Yes, they're designed to seem that way.
Which is why I earlier stated that my issue wasn't with listing them, but specifically, the way you presented them.
I've also not presented my beliefs
You used the word "murdering" to describe a transgender woman playing sports with other women, despite her playing at a level comparable to them.
You absolutely presented your beliefs.
You used the word "murdering" to describe a transgender woman playing sports with other women, despite her playing at a level comparable to them.
Oh come off it. Watch the video, she's a damn head taller than almost everyone she's playing against and God knows how many ppunds heavier.
If we don't want to be the crazy side we have to come to terms with arguments about issues, even important ones, not being only good or evil.
I went through the numbers to highlight her performance is on par with the rest of her team, and you still think that I'm being unreasonable
As I said, you presented your position quite clearly, which is why I called you out
I don't think you're unreasonable, you have more context than myself and any other casual North American sports fan who (shockingly!) hasn't learned the points per game rates of Aussie rules footie. BUT, for most who have a casual understanding of sports, seeing someone a foot taller than their competition makes us go "huh, that seems wild."
As we do when reading one of the most reputable papers in the world raising concerns about transgender health science methodology.
(For what it's worth, in my personal experience of playing mid level co-ed rec league sports in a large liberal city for awhile, I've played against a few teams, mostly their trans player was the best woman on their team and by not a small margin. We don't give a shit because, like I said, mid level co-ed rec league sports.)
The fact you feel compelled to "call out" someone trying to sincerely answer a reasonable question kinda speaks volumes.
someone trying to sincerely answer a reasonable question
Yeah, that's why you linked to transphobic hit pieces and described trans women in sports with hugely emotionally loaded terms
Because you're reasonable
As I said from the beginning, your comment was fine unti you let some of your more transphobic opinions out in the final paragraph. That paragraph was not "reasonable"
If you're at the point where you're calling articles in ond of the most reputable papers on Earth "transphobic hit pieces", you need go re-evaluate.
Edit: there's a reason trump always screams about the crooked media for their crime of factual reporting.
U are literally denying objective reality at best it weakens ur arguments at worse it makes u look like a grifter.
Bruh check out the guys post history, read their comment history, they arent exactly a trans ally
I don't recall posting about trans anything, can you refresh my memory?
Edit: Oh, it's you! Are you making this assumption because I disagree with you and condemn the advocating of violence on republicans and democrats?!?
mainstream culture
Talk to any random person on the street and they don't fucking care about identity politics.
Extremists are not the mainstream no matter how much they shout about it.
No, most people aren't going out of their way to hurt trans people, but those loud extremists are creating a negative connotation in some people's minds. That's no different from racism.
Extremists on both sides are a problem, so when you say "those loud extremists" a reasonable person would have no idea who you're talking about. I think you're correct in either instance, but I doubt that's what you where going for.
Oh. My bad. I thought a reasonable person would assume I meant the loud extremists that match the topic of this post.
There's a reason conservatives campaign against "woke." And most conservatives I know socially called the election a win against woke, even if they couldn't exactly name a woke policy that Harris proposed.
Harris explicitly didn't play identity politics, and I applaud her for it. I think the left is starting to realise even people who agree with them dislike being told what to think ... one can dream right.
I like your dream and fully agree on Harris.
Sadly (though I am admittedly a pessimist and would love to be wrong) I think the Left elites/party brass are coming to that realization on identity politics. But I dont think mainstream/cultural Left is and unfortunately, I think Right and centre Right curious voters view the political and cultural Left as the same.
Which I don't get because they're all about rape as a jail punishment
Can we compromise? No trans people in sports and trans people have their own unique prison or cell block and young teens can take puberty blockers and estrogen so they don't need to try to pay 150,000 in facial feminization plastic surgery at 18 or 19, money of which they can only get quickly from sex work and not going to school? Sound like a good compromise?
I don't know what the answers are!
A lot of this stuff is mostly at the state level which seems almost reasonable.
I imagine the big actual fight on this would come down to when are parents able to over-ride their kids wishes and vice versa. It's a shitty battle for trans kids; if you don't let them access medicine early, it puts them on a brutal path as you pointed out. But I also can't imagine conservatives would be chill letting their kids alter their sex at such a young age. (From the parents' perspective, what if this is just some teenage drama with lifelong repercussions?)
We don't let kids get tattoos (and thank Christ for that, otherwise I'd probably have Wolverine fighting the Zerg on my chest or something) this seems bigger.
I dunno, like most real world issues, it's tricky. And at the fun intersection of children and a rapidly changing perspective of gender, well damn, there are going to be some ugly fights.
I just don't think it's as much of a random fad for kids as conservatives worry.
the analogy of "oh i want a cool new weird haircut/strange tattoo" = same as getting hormones and genital altering surgery seems incorrect to me
kids are not that stupid at that age and gender is mostly hardwired. i just don't think kids of that age would take it trivially
many trans kids exhibit extreme opposite gender behavior from very early ages. I am not talking about boys liking pink or not liking trucks, i am talking about boys crying because they can't wear dresses and hating the male parts of their body. There is something that happens to some XY or XX brains in utero that causes the default brain wiring that causes certain behavior to be the opposite of what it normally is. This shouldn't be that unfathomable. There are animals that contain DNA from before certain evolutions (like tailless animals having tail DNA) and it's just turned off. The idea that epigenetics, prenatal hormone levels, and endocrine disruptors can't alter sexual identity development isn't really supported by data, and even though the exact way transgenderism occurs isn't fully understood, it's not caused by some evil Satanic vodoo or a liberal Hollywood plot.
The only reason why this isn't accepted as true is an anti-science mentality caused by religion, and your response is biased by religion or conformity whether you realize it or not.
I just don’t think it’s as much of a random fad for kids as conservatives worry.
I agree. And the science might as well!
But I think Conservatives look at recent research, especially anything touching social sciences, as the product of what they view as an extremely liberal academic elite. Admittedly, I am similarly skeptical of most reports and analyses by the Heritage foundation and the like even when they share their methodology.
A charitable version of the conservative parent viewpoint might be something like "if my kid is genuinely trans, of course I'll support them. But I am a parent and know best about how to protect them, even if it is from themselves."
At the end of the day, I think a lot of conservative parents are opposed to the idea that government, or experts, or whomever could over-rule them about their own kids. Especially on a subject about which they probably feel somewhat uncomfortable.
I also don't think religion is a requirement for close mindedness, though there is significant overlap.
Religious people control their kids through the village support system of their church. Some kids are learning things at public school which are not in line with those beliefs. This is scary for parents. Parents don’t want to lose their children, and can’t imagine loving them as somebody else. Case in point Elon And his trans daughter Vivian.
I’m quite liberal and atheist, but the prospect of a transitioning child is troubling to me. While I’d have no problem supporting a gay child, I feel very strongly about body acceptance, and I reject body dysmorphia. Transitioning to another gender is to me, not too different from a woman who wants augmentation surgeries or a man who is taking steroids. That said I could care less what anybody else does. I think cosmetic surgery and steroids should be legal. I don’t think the government needs to be involved. It’s a decision to discuss with a child, doctor, and parent.
I guess what I’m saying is, I can empathize with the transphobia of conservatives. Where we differ is in how we deal with that fear. They want the government to make society conform to their beliefs. I think it’s up to the individual parent to grow the love in their heart to accept and love whatever their child decides to be.
I just want to say as a trans person, first off, your views are very valid. I think it’s actually great that despite your misgivings you respect the principle of bodily autonomy, which I very much agree with myself. Totally think this is a good take.
I also wanted to give my 2 cents on the experience itself. You liken transition to body modification, and there definitely are parallels. But in my experience, the two are distinct. Like, I have both dysmorphia at times, and dysphoria at others. I’m not 100% happy with my body after transition, but now it’s like, less because I look like a guy and more because I look like a girl but, maybe not with the ideal body I wanted. When that first hit me, my wife told me “welcome to womanhood” and I laughed a little (and cried a little) because it was true, I’d never known a woman who didn’t struggle with her body image.
I also just, can’t really explain how much my mental health has improved. I had terrible anxiety when I entered puberty, and it wasn’t about gender or anything (that I was aware of at the time, anyways). It was almost just like my brain started malfunctioning. I got quieter, I overthought everything, I self medicated with weed and alcohol, became kind of aimless. Then I turned it around, got my career going, got married, worked on myself. I still drank to take the edge off and be able to socialize, but put on a face at parties and figured out how to push through the anxiety. I tried therapy, medication, meditation, you name it, but it never really got too much better, I just got better at working around it.
I had kinda given up on there being an “answer”. I just figured, you know, this is life for me. Not bad, just hard. And then this thing happened, where a lot of stuff I had been pushing down all came up at once. And I transitioned.
I really, really didn’t think it would “solve” things. Like, I thought it felt right, that it would make things better. But I was trying not to get my hopes up. And at first it didn’t, like hormones didn’t really immediately fix everything. It was more subtle. It was like.. like slowly waking up from a long and tiring nightmare. The kind you don’t remember much of, you just keep that vague sense of unease for a while.
It’s been a year and a half. I can go to parties and not drink now, and just, relax. Have fun. Socialize. I can make friends and talk to strangers. I still have anxiety, I still have problems, but like, my brain just works better. I don’t know how else to describe it. I make connections I never did before, understand people and empathize with them more.
I feel happy. Not in a like, “this is new and exciting” kind of way, but a sort of deep contentedness. Peace.
I don’t think this is a silver bullet. It doesn’t solve all your problems, and it sure as hell won’t solve anything for a cis person. It just helps to take a constant burden out of the way. And for me, even if there had been 0 physical changes, I would 100% take estrogen just for the mental effects it has had alone. It’s been the best mental healthcare I have ever received.
I appreciate your story and I’m really happy for you. I think if I was child free I would just say hell yes I support everybody to be themselves. But being a parent makes me more protective and cautious and concerned and if I’m being honest I kind of hate that change in myself. It’s so easy for me to say I support autonomy but I already know that it won’t be when my child is asserting their own autonomy. I know that parents don’t have control, only influence, but it’s hard for me to walk that fine line.
Yeah, I get that. I again want to take a second to acknowledge that children are hard when it comes to this stuff. I absolutely understand that people have hesitation around considering minors transitioning, I think that’s really valid and it’ll probably be a common feeling for decades, if not longer. I want to be a parent soon myself, and even though I’m trans, I’ve thought about “what if my kid is trans?” And tbh that gives me a lot of anxiety and worry. I’d much rather not have to deal with that 😅
My path was also not 100% clear. Some trans people describe knowing since they were 4, or 8, or as soon as puberty started. I didn’t really start questioning until 19-20 or so, and I didn’t transition until 32. I would say I knew something was off for a lot longer, but it took me a while to figure out what that was. It was also a very confusing process, and I tried literally everything before accepting this. I remember being a teen and a young adult and thinking “this is it, this will fix things” so many times, only for it not to work out. It’s why I had given up.
So I really get why it’s like, scary to let someone who’s still growing and learning make decisions that will change their path permanently.
At the same time, that journey was really, really hard. There were times I wasn’t sure I would make it. I got into some really bad places, mentally and in real life. I sometimes wonder if it would have been easier, if I had figured this out sooner. And I do believe there are people who know much sooner, who just have that sense internally that they are a different gender, a much stronger internal compass than mine. That would have been torture to deal with if I had known that.
I lost a brother to suicide, and I know a lot of trans youth are at risk. So all of that and my own experience is why I really feel that this path should be navigated between the parent, the child, and their doctors. It’s just not going to be an easy process, no matter what, and I don’t think anyone can do it perfectly. I don’t blame parents who hold back on affirming strongly, but I do hope in time there’s less worry and fear about this, as we spread knowledge and our experience. Especially around social transition and just trying things out and experimenting. That’s the best way to get more real information - does the child actually like living as the opposite gender, doing things like that? If they do, it’s still scary, but you know that they aren’t just imagining the grass is greener. And if not, then cool! It really was “just a phase” lol.
Thanks for listening, it’s very much appreciated ❤️ you sound like a good parent and a kind person.
How to be supportive without being encouraging. How to stand firm without being inflexible. How to allow freedom but also supervision. There’s no manual for this stuff, and it seems like “experts” write advice for the extremes, not for the middle ground.
Yeah, like, even generally those are really tough questions. And every kid is different right? Even among my brothers, I had 5, and they were all different. One was a rebel, one was a golden child, one was a space case... it's not really possible to be perfect.
But if you're talking specifically about gender and exploration, I can share my thoughts there. I'm not a parent yet, so I haven't gone through this, but here's how I would approach it I think:
First, let's talk about social experimentation and transition. All of this is pre-medication and would be the first steps of things generally. This is a time to figure out what they want by trying things out, which is something we all do during childhood and adolescence. It can start at any time, and it can fizzle out or keep going.
- In general, I would let my kids play with and wear whatever they wanted from a young age. I think it's important for them to have independence, and I also think that really by pushing them to dress "appropriately" for their gender, you kind of are encouraging that behavior (and implicitly discouraging them exploring themselves). Especially at a young age, kids just decide they like random things in my experience and letting them do that sets them up to not have like, a feeling that it's "forbidden" for lack of a better word, AND especially it lets your kid know you're safe. That if they want to try things out more when they're a teen or later, they can trust you to talk about it and try to work it out together.
- To be clear, I would not encourage my kids to experiment or try things at a young age. In fact, I would probably not encourage it at any age. The impulse or the idea should come from them, I wouldn't want to plant the seed of it. In fact, that's kind of the "prime directive" that we follow as a trans community: Even if someone seems to be struggling with their gender and asks you if their trans, you have to tell them that this is something only they can figure out. I can tell them about my experience, what I went through, etc. But even if they're telling me every single symptom of gender dysphoria, the most I would tell them is something like "this really sounds like it could be, you should definitely be seeing a therapist about it and try to work it out and think on it."
- If my kid did bring up the idea of trying something out - like wearing a dress or a binder, trying on makeup, cutting their hair - I would make it clear that I think that's completely ok. I would not necessarily encourage it. Like, if they said "I'm thinking about cutting my hair short" I wouldn't say "oh definitely, you should try that, you've never had short hair!". I would instead say something like "for sure, if that's something you wanna try that's cool. Let me know, I can take you to a barber." Or if it sounds like they really want to, but are nervous, I might say "well it sounds like it's something you want to try. If you're worried what other people think, I don't think that should hold you back, it's completely ok to try things out."
- If it moves forward to full on social transition - that is, trying out a new name and different pronouns, etc. I would respect whatever they asked me to call them and expect others to do that as well. Honestly I would probably like to be part of the name-choosing process, it feels only fair haha! But one thing here is that I would NOT expect everyone else to always get it right, and I would NOT accept them being like, super upset if someone is really trying and they mess up. As a teen I would react way more emotionally to small missteps like that, but as an adult... I misgender myself a lot, lol. Like, I think for a lot of people it's just mental muscle memory, and it takes time. And this is especially true if they're like, trying tons of new pronouns or names or switching things up constantly. Like, you can't both expect everyone to always get it right AND for there not to be a learning period 😝
- In all of this, if they try things out and don't feel happy, I would point that out. If my child thought they were trans and started socially transitioning, but then started really complaining about the things they had to do now, or complaining about missing certain things, I'd note that. I'd specifically be looking for if they were missing certain things due to their new gender role. Like, "I miss playing my sport" is different than "I miss hanging out with the guys and being one of them", if that makes sense. And if that came up, I would just point out that there's no reason they can't do the thing and be trans. Like, if they want to be a guy but wear dresses, or want to be a girl but play football, at least in theory those things should be fine, because from my perspective those aren't inherently gendered.
- IMPORTANT NOTE: If the reason they can't do certain things that don't align with their new/old gender is due to society's rules, then that's a modifier here. There are high schools that let girls play football and places where it's acceptable for boys to wear feminine clothing, and there are not, whether we like it or not. So if they're like "I'm trans, but I still want to do a thing that's not allowed by my old gender", I WOULD NOT say "well, that's the rules, that's what happens because you're transitioning". That puts me on the side of people that made, from their perspective, unjust rules. I would instead say "yeah, that really sucks, I don't think there's really a good reason for them to have those rules, other than I think I'd worry for your safety because society is going to discriminate against you if you break them." Hear them out, let them vent, let them know you support them, but that those are things that just might not change.
So basically, let them try things out, respect whatever they're doing at the time, let them know they have permission to try things out (within reason). The important thing here is that all of these things are easily reversible. They could decide to try something out one day, and change it back the next. So, there's really not much harm in trying things out, unless we get all the way to like, legally changing their name or something.
So, onto more permanent things, specifically medical treatment.
- First off, I would find a doctor and therapist that is experienced with trans and gender non-conforming youth, and I would also look into and follow the WPATH guidelines (they're the organization that recommends standards of care for trans adults and minors). These would help me set a baseline of what typical treatment looks like and what to expect.
- Surgeries would not happen until they're an adult. They can wait for that, and frankly a lot of surgeries should wait until they're older, they are a lot to put on a person.
- Hormones I think I would be ok with at a normal time for puberty, AFTER at least a year (and ideally several years) of social transition and blockers. So like, 16 I think is probably the right age, and plenty of people really hit full on puberty a bit late so I think that would be fine. But if they didn't figure this out until they were 17, I would tell them they should try to wait at least a year before they start hormone therapy, and that maybe we could do hormone blockers in the meantime.
- Hormone blockers are trickier. I would trust medical experts the most here, but it makes sense that in general you want to give the child as much time as possible to try things out socially and make sure this is right for them. So, I would probably be ok with starting them when puberty in general starts, and continuing as long as there no major side-effects. And I would absolutely be doing my own research into them to make sure it was safe, wouldn't have long term effects, etc.
So to sum that up, I would generally be conservative in the sense of trying to give as much time as possible before they make any permanent decisions, and I would do my research and really try to make sure that nothing they're doing is going to cause permanent harm. But I would also trust my child's doctors and medical team here.
That's how I feel about it all right now at least. Let me know if you have any thoughts or questions about this, and like I said before, I think if you were looking at this and saying "well I get why that works for you, but I wouldn't want to buy my 8 year old son a dress" or "I think my kids would have to wait until 18 to do anything medical," I do think those are understandable feelings and I would respect the right, as a parent, to parent your kid in the best way that you can. Every kid is different, every path is different, and it's really hard to know what's right. There's lots of extremes out there and sometimes I think it feels like we can't ever just not know or try our best, and the reality is, we never know and life is hard. You seem like you're trying, which is more than a lot of people 😊
I feel very strongly about body acceptance, and I reject body dysmorphia.
Drag wants to take a crack at explaining this.
The mind is a machine. We have free will, but that free will has limits. If you try to hold your breath until you pass out, you'll probably fail. Your subconscious will demand air and you'll give in. The human jaw is capable of producing enough force to bite off a finger. But you can't chew off your own finger unless you're on drugs. Your brain won't let you. We can do a lot of things with our brains, but some are hard, and under normal circumstances some are impossible.
Accepting your body when you're five pounds heavier than you'd like is something our brains can do without that much trouble. Accepting your body when you're a hundred pounds heavier than you'd like is hard. Some people never manage to summon enough willpower to do it. Accepting your body when you're the wrong sex is, for most people, impossible. It doesn't work. The brain has limits, and those limits kick in.
I feel the need to add to my feelings on this, because I don’t like admitting that I am somewhat transphobic. I strongly believe in bodily autonomy and I think 18 is too old to grant it. For tattoos, piercings, health decisions and anything else relating to oneself, I think autonomy should be granted as soon as it is claimed. In some cases of teenage pregnancy, the conception itself is a declaration of autonomy, unless the parents gave permission, which would be weird. I’m not sure a minimum age can be set. I think teenagers should be able to legally divorce (reverse adoption?) their own parents too. I recognize that this is also an extreme view that would frighten most parents. It frightens me too. But I kinda feel like picking out specific issues like trans rights or abortion is ignoring an overarching issue of parental/societal control. Not too long ago it was fairly common for husbands to view their wives as property. Many if not most parents seem to view their children as property. Maybe someday that too will change. It’s not as though 18 is some magical age of self actualization. Some people will be dependent on their parents well past that age if not forever, and some people are ready to face the world alone at 15, maybe younger.
I understand. For each individual there’s going to be a limit to what is reasonable or even affordable to make their body work for them. Some people wear glasses while others choose contacts while others opt for lasik. Maybe it’s similar for somebody who has these feelings. Some find contentment being a feminine gay man, some are straight but want to cross dress, others want hormones, and some want more.
But understand for me that line is way more toward “au natural” than mainstream society. I don’t think women should shave body hair and I don’t like cosmetic surgery or even makeup. I think high heels and even pointed shoe aesthetics for men and women are wrong. I don’t like men who shave their face. I hate perfumes and strong scents on people. But my wife shaves her legs because she wants to and that’s fine.
I can’t really tell you how I would be because I am not. I will defend trans rights and I will defend the right to get face tattoos. But I wouldn’t want my child to get a face tattoo. But I would still love them if they did. All I’m trying to say is I understand the fear of the conservatives. And I think it’s wrong to expect the government to ease that fear by limiting options for those who want to feel comfortable being themselves.
But at the same time I don’t really want to encourage kids that they can be whatever they want, because there are some biological limits for each person and it’s worth acknowledging and accepting those limits. Some people can’t learn to sing, while for others it’s natural. Some people are clumsy while others can excel at many sports at a high level. Some people are incredibly sharp thinkers and others are better with their hands. My own personal view is that life is easier if you find your own path within your constraints. Hopefully my kid adopts my values, but maybe not. That’s okay too.
Hating gays isn’t cool anymore and will get backlash even from conservatives.
Trans people are the new gays in this sense
I would love for you to be right. If you're in the US, though, voter data doesn't seem to support that.
It would be amazing to live in a country where half the populace agreed that my son has the right to simply exist in peace but I don't think we do anymore.
I figure racism will stick around long after transphobia is out of style.
Because no middle class white kid ever sat their parents down and said "mom, dad... I'm black"
Homophobia is illegal in Romania
That doesnt stop every single person i know that isnt from the capital be openly homophobic
That's a good point. And political movements like trans exclusionary LGB are there to piggy back off of.
After it became less acceptable to explicitly hate the gays in public they needed a new target. There's a lot of people who like being riled up with hatred, who are fearful and need a bogeyman, etc. It's either human nature or something deeply embedded in our culture. Eventually they will move on and find a new target to focus their hate on.
Their systems of power rely on having an "in" group and an "out" group. Overt racism is less acceptable these days because now there are brown Republicans, but transphobia? Very in.
They're just choosing a new group to "other" so that we don't realize they're coming for everyone who doesn't fit into their narrow worldview.
This
-
People fear new unknown things (as perceived by the individual), especially when it comes to bodies and human form, instinctively.
-
It doesn't conform to their strict societal standards as crafted by thousands of years of culture and history. The authorities have always persecuted and cracked down on anything that threatens the patriarchal standard.
-
Minorities make the easiest targets. Trans people are an extreme minority.
-
Some people think it has more to do with sexuality and sexual urges, so their perception is that it is perversion.
Projection is also a common way for people to deflect blame for societal ills. Religious zealots will ignore and even shield sexual abusers present in their own institutions and divert that animosity to outside groups that make convenient targets. They are ok with the abusers within their walls because they are seeking absolution through religious systems. They are not ok with queer people because they need to scapegoat a group to explain why things don't seem to be getting better.
It's a failure of empathy. People hate and/or fear what they don't understand.
They can't empathize with someone not feeling right in their own skin like that, so all their rationalizations for things like "why would they want to use that bathroom" end up stemming from what they have left, which is unsavory intent, making them threatening.
Unless I am wrong I never heard of one shooting up a school church or whatever.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Nashville_school_shooting
Even by population ratios, that's gotta be really rare.
Outwordly trans people make up like 1% of the population. So one incident could screw with the stats more than you'd like.
Not with the rate we have school shootings
Outwordly trans people make up like 1% of the population. So one incident could screw with the stats more than you'd like.
I don't think it would, especially if you look at it over a period of time.
It could definitely be misrepresented, but anyone with the intellectual curiosity to look at ratios would probably be less likely to misrepresent it.
Because queerness (trans, gender non conforming, gender fluid, agender, bigender and related) threatens hierarchy.
In western society regardless of how ‘progressive’ some parts of it have gotten, for the majority there’s still a strict hierarchy. Man most important, then woman, then children first boys then girls. Trans people completely disrupt this hierarchy by being able to change what they are and those who cling to hierarchy freak the fuck out over it.
Then there’s the sexual panic, a straight man who’s insecure is gonna freak out if the woman they think is cute actually has a penis.
If that were true, then it would be trans men getting the most attention because they're the ones cheating their way up this hierarchy. In my experience, 99% of the hate is directed at trans women.
Meh, I don't know if it's strictly a hierarchy thing. I think it's probably more "just" a heteronormative thing. Closed-minded people who don't like things or people that are different. Fear of difference. I'm just speculating, here.
I can also see the sexual panic aspect.
Yes! Screw the patriarchy
I don't agree. For ages in any life or death situation it is woman and children first. Men are the strongest of the bunch, any respectable man is putting his children and wife onto a lifeboat before themselves. You'd have a hard time finding a father/husband who wouldn't.
Your little scenario explicitly presumes that the man would be the one in charge, making this decision.
Uneducated people in rural areas struggle very much with understanding their experiences of others, and have very strange ideas about how the world works. I told my grandmother I wanted to move to Chicago - she’s convinced I’m going to get gang murdered. (She would be horrified if I told her about wandering around LA on foot)
The idea that there are options other than cisgender heterosexual people is threatening to their understanding of their world. Many have not thought about their gender or sexuality; it’s assumed that you’ll get married to the opposite sex, get gender appropriate jobs, have kids, and go to church on Sunday. That’s what life is in Anadarko or Siloam Springs. Many also struggle with unaddressed trauma from the opioid/fent crisis, or military service - so they think the appropriate response to anguish about your body should just be to just cope with it.
Many of these men are secretly bisexual. Many, many, many heterosexually married men seek out sexual encounters with gay men on the side. They would never want to be in a relationship with a man or someone they perceived as a strange, mentally defective man - for many of them that would also assault their understandings of a relationship as more of a property thing. They feel guilty about porn usage, especially the Christian ones, but externalize it as hatred.
The woman are miserable and are committed to making everyone else miserable as well. You gain power in those communities by policing others, especially young women. They are threatened by the idea that they weren’t locked into compulsive heterosexuality and performative femininity. There was a possibility that they could have graduated college, or not had children.
They get the program though. They’re proper Puritans. If life is suffering then the only joy to be had is in watching other people. And what better target than those who are defying our most basic sociological roles? These are the same people who host gender reveal parties - it matters to them. So it must matter to everyone else.
That’s my guess as a trans man at least, obviously I’m biased.
We have a lot of LGBTI people in our climbing group
I have never had an issue with any of them
But the people trying to be hyper masculine? Yep..
I feel like it's because they never left high school. A lot of them are simply trying the same thing that worked when they are a kid. Everyone else grows up
This video explains it better than me, but mostly a combination of religion being against trans people and bad science.
You need an enemy who can't fight back... So it's never, the white male millionaires are coming for us [...] (21:40)
"Religion" is too broad a term. Conservatives like to call what they practice Christianity, although it would have appalled Christ. They also like to represent themselves as the mainstream of Christianity, but they are very much in the minority. They just get on the news more often.
Because hateful people always need an other. an outsider. Someone be fearful of, yet feel smugly superior too
It used to be black people.
then it was the irish and the itallians.
then it was hispanics.
then it was gays
and now its trans people.
Oh honey it never stopped being black people.
Most on that list are still targets. A world without trans people cannot exist, and noone's happy to be a canary in the coal mine...better believe anyone on that list is watching their own rights be stripped away when trans people's rights are. (General Bodily Autonomy not the least among them)
never said it didnt, but the narrative/oyt loud focus does shift with time towards new boogiemen
Sorted by controversial, wish me luck boys!
He ded
Nazis do this dumb thing where they go "hey that small and therefore relatively defenseless group (badassness of individuals aside) is the cause of all our problems, let's kill them to solve everything!"
Surprisingly, it never works.
So they do it again with somebody else, and somebody else, and somebody else, until everybody on earth is killed by nazis or somebody stops them.
As for why anybody is dumb enough to fall for it in the first place...it's anybody's guess.
Surprisingly, it never works.
The Holocaust happened and Trump got elected. If those two things don't count as examples of this hateful strategy working then idk what does.
I think they meant it doesn't solve any problems because they never were the problem.
Because of tropes like https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CreepyCrossdresserfrom movies like Silence of the Lambs, Dressed to Kill, and Psycho. It puts the idea of men dressing like women as a means of tricking women to attack them into the collective unconscious.
Because Trump spent $19 million on transphobic ads during football games in battleground states. Because they need a Boogeyman to rile up their base.
It doesn't have to make sense. You might as well be asking how can the KKK hate people of color or how can Nazis hate Jewish people.
Because conservatives are smooth brained and small minded. They need someone to hate in order to make themselves feel superior so they don't feel like complete losers
They're conservative. The whole name is based on the principle that they want to maintain the old way rather than progress. I think it stems from fear of a changing world. The old world with the old rules provided safety, it was understandable, the rules were clear, and the rules didn't hurt them. Now some people are "attacking" their world, their rules, everything that offers them safety and understanding. So they feel attacked.
It's the same thing, but with another subject every time. Whether it is women getting rights, which threatens their safe world with clear gender roles. Or gay people, who threaten the simple rules like "boys love girls", "in order to be successful, get a job, marry, and get kids". Or non-white people getting rights. What if they vote for things that "we" don't want? What if "they" ruin the world that "we" got so used to.
Trans and especially non-binary people are just the next group in line that threatens their simple world. When men are people born as men and women are people born as women, it's way easier to force people into the traditional roles. The old rules still work, "boy marries girl, gets kids". And when they speak out about their "concerns* they are (rightfully) called out for it. So they become defensive and start doing whatever they're doing now.
I don't think it's quite that simple. I'm a dad to a FtM trans teenager and I was born in the early 80s. There's a lot of "inertia" to the worldview presented as "normal" in education, media, and society at large just in my lifetime.
I think the first time I learned that homosexuality was a thing was from Ellen. I know now that everyone isn't hetero but every relationship I saw around me, in books, in movies for my the most formative years of my life defined it as "normal" in my brain.
All I knew outside of "gender norms" was Bugs Bunny in drag, Bosom Buddies, Some Like it Hot, Rocky Horror. It was "not normal", a joke.
I come from a liberal family with a liberal upbringing. I've considered myself an LGBT ally for a long time, but I still have a lot of implicit biases in my head.
When my child came out as trans, those implicit biases were the first things into my head. I love my son for who he is, want him to be happy, and fully support him. When he decided to dress fem for the first time after hatching my implicit biases were confused. But it doesn't matter what those biases say because I consciously support what makes him happy.
My parents were born in the 50s. They are both unabashed feminists but they had another 30 years of that "inertia" to overcome when my son hatched. They still occasionally forget the right pronouns. His one remaining great grandmother has almost 20 years more inertia to overcome and still uses the wrong name occasionally.
I guess what I'm saying is that I agree with you to an extent. These things threaten their "inertia" and it's hard to question yourself like that. It's easier to dig your heels in and fight back.
I think we agree yeah. More progressive people will be more open to challenge their "inertia" with new ideas that they believe are right. I think more conservative people give in more to the feeling of these "new" ideas being "wrong". That doesn't mean that more progressive people don't feel those same feelings. I'm in my early 30s and I notice that I do start to struggle more with the difference between what I was taught (and thus what I subconsciously sometimes feel) and how I perceive the world now from a logical perspective. I strongly support people being trans or non-binary because I feel like it makes the world a better place, but deep inside there's still some part that feels like it's wrong for people to deviate from the gender rules I've been fed from birth.
They have to have somebody to hate so they don't hate themselves so much.
They're a convenient political target because it makes insecure men not want to be associated with them. Believe it or not, a similar thing happened last time Republicans won the popular vote in 2004 - back then the issue was gay marriage. Bush went hard on opposing that and it helped him win.
There are plenty of atheist transphobes.
They exist, but let's not act like religion isn't playing a huge role in the perpetuation of trans hate. If a person says that they dislike trans people, 9/10 times they are going to be religious. A lot of other cases will stem from a person coming from a religious family, or culture, if they aren't religious themselves.
It's not a requirement to hate gay and trans people to be an atheist, but it is a requirement to at least act like you do to be a member of many different religious denominations.
I would say that religious institutions allow the congregation of people and thus a congregation of thought into similar things as one another, not that religion as a whole is transphobic or something. Ain't no need to use the same kinda bigotry you hate to justify saying something so wildly vague as to be useless. Use some more nuanced and complex thoughts please.
I can point to multiple denominations of religious people that literally say that being gay or trans is forbidden, yet I can not find one Atheistic group that does the same. To act like religion doesn't do it's part in perpetuating this kind of hate is foolish.
I'm not saying all religion is bad or worthless or anything, just that it definitely contributes to this problem. I'm also not saying that all religions are the same, its mostly just the Abrahamic ones that seem to perpetuate the hate more than others.
Which is a lot more nuanced than the OP reply of "religion".
Fair point, the OP is a bit over the top. I agree, It's not all religions.
Conservatives use fear to manipulate their constituents as their primary means to rally support. A minority scapegoat many of their supporters don't know in person, like trans people, are easily demonized by politicians and clergy to pretend trans folks are pedophiles and sex assaulters projecting their own party and priest crimes, it's the same thing they try to do with fear mongering homosexuals as a previous scapegoat to distract and deflect from their awful policy privileging the wealth class and harming poor and middle class people, they need someone to blame for their own awful behavior and choices.
It seems that way because the minority of people who are against trans people are very loud and obnoxious, and their voices are heavily amplified by sites like Facebook and Twitter.
some schmucks want to exploit the very basic fear of the unfamiliar, and they pointed it at trans folk to get votes or whatever.
I don't think it's most people. I (choose to) believe that's a loud minority.
Most of the culture wars bullshit is originating from a tiny but disproportionately noisy number of people.
But then, because their claims are so outrageous, the media picks up on it and runs with it, without bothering to be proportional to the number of people causing the problem in the first place.
I see a lot of mostly correct answers here, but as a trans person myself I can't help but feel they are all missing the core concept.
People hate trans folk for the same reason "get back in the kitchen" is still said to women in any non-"traditional" role or the "angry black man/woman" is said about anyone advocating for their own rights. There are strict gender and racial roles that are enforced by our society so rigidly, that many have assumed them to be naturally correct laws of the universe. Anyone existing outside of those roles is seen as either mental illness to be corrected or malicious evil-doers wanting to cause trouble.
When in fact the reality is much simpler, that being human is a more diverse expressive and dynamic experience than those holding on to those "natural laws" would like to admit. To exist outside the role you were "assigned" is a threat to society that assigns the roles, ergo a threat to the very way of life for those who see gender, sexual and racial hegemony as innate truths.
Conservatives who hold high tradition are naturally the first to speak out and seek to regulate us back in to "normal society" via legislation but liberals are absolutely not immune. To reduce transphobia to a political wedge issue, while correct, doesn't quite explain the more innocuous yet quite prevalent transphobia inside left leaning spaces.
I can only recall one instance of a trans person going postal. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Nashville_school_shooting
Even trans people aren't beating the "nearly all mass shooters are men" statistic.
He must have been bullied terribly.
The interesting thing about the furor over trans people existing is that 90% of any harm, real or imagined, stems from mistreatment of people. Conservatives treat trans people badly (supposedly) due to mental issues that are caused by the way conservatives treat trans people.
Remember how the police/Alex Jones kept making big talk about a “manifesto” which never manifested?
https://www.politifact.com/article/2023/mar/31/no-evidence-growing-trend-trans-radicalization-or
Goose meme: One out of how many total?
In a less direct way one standing theory is that it’s tied to cultural issues with gender relations and due to the lack of a cultural role for us (at least in cultures where that applies or where those roles were damaged during colonialism, which was very common). Then there’s also the oversexualization of trans people.
For the first one Julia Serrano does a good job going into a lot of detail for a big chunk of it, but the quick summary is that there’s two axes of sexism: traditional (one sex and that which is associated is better than the other, traditionally prioritizing the masculine over the feminine) and oppositional (that that which is associated is deeply connected and immutable). All sorts of people run up against oppositional sexism, from cis gay people to dudes who like to sew. But it’s likely necessary to reinforce traditional sexism.
Then there’s the lack of cultural space. It’s being built, but it isn’t done yet and until it’s been uncontroversial for some time it’ll be at risk. It’s the issues of “I don’t know how to treat them” and “it’s against god”. It’s people angry that their understanding of one of the most vital parts of their culture is being called to make space for something that’s new to them
Then there’s the oversexualization. Trans people all throughout the world have a long history of resorting to sex work to survive. That means that to many people our existence is seen as inherently sexual. I grew up where trans people only appeared on tv as tragic sex workers, jokes of erotic disgust, or Springer style freak shows, and the next closest depictions were as murderous erotic crossdressers (which many saw as the same thing). And so now here I am, one of them, demanding you treat me as an educated professional and a peer and a decent chunk of bigots will see my face as inherently pornographic and therefore unfit to display around children. They hear about teenagers wanting to transition and think of it as sexualizing them. And for a certain portion of people they’re mad that a porn category and type of exotic hooker is demanding rights
There’s more, and I didn’t say it all the best I could (typed it out off and on over a while between doing things as well as it being something I mostly break down in discussions with other trans people). But yeah, we’re different and we challenge basic understandings of some of the foundations of society and culture, but our liberation helps break down the issues you’re already facing and a lot of the time the requests we’re making make life easier for cis people once y’all get used to us being around.
I support trans people to do whatever they want to themselves but unfortunately one did shoot up a school https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Nashville_school_shooting
With trans people making up 0.5-1.6% of the US population, wouldn't it be strange if not a single school shooter was trans?
That question lead me down a rabbit hole: There have been 417 school shootings since Columbine in 1999 https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/interactive/school-shootings-database/
I don't have statistics on the number of school shootings perpetrated by multiple people. But I suspect that it's a miniscule number. So I'm going to go with 417 individuals carrying out acts counted as school shootings. And not to try to be John Oliver or something, but what counts as a school shooting may be as little as this numbnuts who shot them self in the leg in a high school parking lot https://www.wptv.com/news/region-the-glades/belle-glade/lockdown-lifted-at-glades-central-high-school-following-shooting.
0.5% of 417 is 2.1 and 1.6% is 6.7.
Meaning that somewhere between 2 and 7 trans school shooters would indicate that trans people are just as likely as cis people to carry out school shootings. That only a single shooter has been trans, may not be statistically significant, as we're dealing with integers and it's pretty darn close.
So I'm left to conclude that being trans isn't significant in being a school shooter. Trans people may just be as fucked up as the rest of us.
What I'm more interested in is how the trans man in Nashville in 2023 would have counted, if this statistic didn't only cover until 2022 https://www.statista.com/statistics/1463155/active-shooters-us-schools-by-gender/
Your calculation doesn't track. Although i agree with your overarching point, the percentage of trans people in the US between 1999 and now would've been on an upward trajectory, so your calculations would have to account for that
[...] the percentage of trans people in the US between 1999 and now would've been on an upward trajectory [...]
A larger fraction of the population in most western countries are certainly openly trans now, than were in 1999. But I don't know about all trans people, I think the fraction has stayed the same, but coming out has become easier (I'm not saying that it's easy, I'm saying that I believe that it's easier than in 1999)
But let's assume that you're right, and fewer people used to be trans compared to the population size. That would mean fewer expected school shootings by trans people. Which could explain how the expected interval in my calculations is 2-7 shooters while we've only seen one. Once again confirming that trans people are just people.
Since when do conservatives care about mass shootings?
There are a lot of factors at play that make transness an easy target to be the scary other bigots rally around.
The simple truth is that unless you yourself are trans you cannot understand the trans experience. There is no way to explain the scope or impact it has on someone's life. It's automatically alien and provides essentially a permanent out group. Anyone who is uncomfortable with people who are different or that have different experiences than themselves are almost certainly transphobic to some degree. Right now to the best of my knowledge transphobia is the only thing all hate groups share.
Trans people are the current scapegoats because prior to the pandemic we had an explosion of trans people feeling safe enough to come out online (I blame Obama making us all feel safe). They are particularly effective because both white nationalists and evangelicals use queerness as a scapegoat all the time anyway so it was easy for them to rally around. Which is why conservative politicians fearmonger around trans people.
It's not that simple, but it's close enough for a lemmy comment.
I’m a queer gender non conforming lesbian who grew up in the 90s and was horrifically violently assaulted for it on the regular by bullies that school authorities never gave a shit about.
I remember the Obama years. I remember back then not trusting the “acceptance”. I never thought it was genuine and to this day I still don’t. I feel bad for those who thought we made real progress. It was always an illusion.
I was severely bullied for just existing on this planet.
Me too, existing as a queer person. I didn’t even know I was queer, I just knew something about me was different. It wasn’t until my late teens that I figured out what was ‘wrong’ with me that the other kids hated so much.
I’m also ADHD and most likely autistic as well. So there’s that.
Its really bad when this stuff goes on and nothing is done about it. I still deal with shit from my childhood because I never got help.
Me too and I’m 35. I struggle with employment and relationships and everything in between. I have extremely deep trauma and multiple kinds of it too. I’ve tried getting help over the years only to be gaslit by providers. I’m once again trying to get help because friends are telling me “this time it will be different a lot has changed in mental health” but I’m extremely apprehensive. It doesn’t help that I got locked up in a psych ward for a week without any government order, they just wouldn’t let me leave. I had to yes the shit out of them to get out, and the meds they put me on made things 10x worse so once I was out of their purview I stopped taking them.
The only thing that’s ever really helped me was weed, but in the eyes of the medical establishment that makes me a “drug addict”.
And lately that doesn’t even help and might be making things worse. I got my hands on some Valium and that’s really the only thing that helps but benzos are so addictive and what I have is black market and I’m unlikely to be able to get it safely (ie, real and not contaminated with fent) again.
be safe friend. drugs can be powerful. I hope you find someone who will actually help you.
Not that it really matters as a legitimate cause to dislike trans people, but the 2023 Nashville shooting at a school was done by a trans person.
It seems like it's always projection with these fascists.
They are the ones whose "party" is full of violent sexual predators. They will never bring up the monsters (including their "president") on their own "team".
Fear, control, indoctrination, tribalism, double standards, poor mortal character, hypocrisy, and because it 'makes them feel icky' and so they have to be loud and obvious about it so that they're community sides with them and doesn't suspect that they're (allegedly) total closet cases.
FYI
They're people, just like the rest of us. Some are great, some are not.
yeah, was going to say - there have been trans mass shooters, lol
Another notable case:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_Springs_nightclub_shooting
Aldrich's attorneys have said in court documents that their client identifies as non-binary and uses they/them pronouns, preferring to be addressed as Mx. Aldrich. Neighbors allege Aldrich to have made hateful comments towards the LGBT community in the past, including frequent usage of homophobic slurs. Aldrich never mentioned being non-binary prior to the shooting and was referred to with masculine pronouns by family members. Police testified they found rainbow-colored shooting targets in Aldrich's home. Experts in online extremism have voiced the possibility that Aldrich's proclaimed self-identification could be disingenuous, while the Center for Countering Digital Hate acknowledges the suspect's past actions and impact on the LGBT community.
I am personally inclined to agree that the self-identification is likely disingenuous, a stunt for the courtroom (maybe to make it harder to argue he committed hate crimes).
Conservatives are afraid of change, because they control current status quo. They can't let people escape from that control, so every nail that is a little outside it's hole gets hammered.
In short, they rather prefer trans (and broadly queers) to hide or die, unless they can control them. Everyone different from what they can control is a big danger. Imagine if everyone could be like they feel like? Conservatives see this as chaos, they are the guardians of peace and good values, so anything not already controlled by them is the opposite, chaos, destruction, fire.
That's why they rarely present anything new, their policies and general opinion tend to fight the natural evolution of civilization. USA, as obviously all of the American Continent, was built by immigrants (and slaves). Now they fight immigrants, undocumented ones mostly, because they can't control them. And we know what happened when 'the libs' back then tried to end slavery, you know, other people that they CONTROLLED.
Thanks for coming to my TED Talk.
First, I'd challenge the 'most people' part. In my experience most people really, truly do not care one way or the other if someone is trans. But to be fair, this may vary between countries, societies, etc.
Edit: I wrote a bunch of other stuff here, but wasn't happy reading it back. Someone else here said religion and bad science, which is close enough to the point I was trying to make that I'll just say that.
I live in texas and transphobia is prevalent enough that misgendering is the norm once people hear my voice. I get looks of disgust often enough that I'm used to it, so yeah it varies from place to place and some people don't know how bad it is because they dont experience it.
Ugh - that's fucking gross of people, and I'm sorry to hear that.
My argument was more when considering 'most people' - most people is a lot of people. An individual doesn't really interact with most people. But that said, you can certainly interact with 'enough people' that an expectation of shoddy treatment is pretty reasonable (if a pretty bullshit set of circumstances individuals shouldn't have to suffer).
Pedantry on my part, I guess, along with likely blindspots I have as a cis male. Fuck transphobia...such meaninglessly hurtful bullshit.
I only know of one, and she's an expert at everything related to fiber channel and tape drives. So I guess it might be that US conservatives are ideologically opposed to cheap long term offline storage.
This is America, we store things in the iCloud or the garage.
I never heard of one shooting up a school church or whatever.
First off, one must be very careful of generalizing to an entire group from the actions of a small sample [1]. Using the metric of whether there have been trans people who have engaged in mass shootings is quite reductionist, and is a faulty generalization — if I am to interpret what you said to mean that "conservatives" are "against" all trans people because they think that they are all responsible for "shooting up" schools and churches. Second, to address your belief, to my knowledge, there has been at least one instance of a school shooter being trans [2].
References
- "Faulty Generalization". Wikipedia. Published: 2024-03-25T17:50Z. Accessed: 2024-11-23T02:49Z. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faulty_generalization
- "2023 Nashville school shooting". Wikipedia. Published: 2024-10-28T23:08Z. Accessed: 2024-11-23T02:51Z. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Nashville_school_shooting.
:::
https://www.politifact.com/article/2023/mar/31/no-evidence-growing-trend-trans-radicalization-or/
A white cis het boy/man shoots up a school how often?
Hell of a ratio, I guarantee it.
https://www.politifact.com/article/2023/mar/31/no-evidence-growing-trend-trans-radicalization-or/
Thank you for the source! One critique that I have of it is that, while it does state that trans people are 4 times more likely than cis people to be victims of violent crime [1], it doesn't appear to answer the question of rates of perpetrating violent crime between trans and cis people — well, aside from conjecture [2][3].
References
-
According to the Williams Institute, a public policy research group on sexual orientation and gender identity issues at the University of California, Los Angeles, transgender people are four times more likely to be a victim of violent crime. In 2022, the institute found that LGBTQ+ people are nine times more likely to be a victim of violent hate crimes. [§"Victims of violence. ¶2.]
-
"When you have this kind of coordinated, concerted campaign against a community, the community becomes insular, their vulnerabilities spike, and that's not when they turn to violence," she added. "The violence is going to be against them. It’s very unlikely the violence will be perpetrated by them." [§"What the evidence shows". ¶3.]
-
"That doesn't mean that trans people can't be violent or extremist — anyone can," Asal said. "But, as far as I'm aware, there is no higher uptick among transgender people than anybody else. Could there be growing anger? Yes, certainly. Do I think they are going to be radicalized and turn to violence? Maybe a couple, but I haven’t seen any evidence of an overall trend." [§"What the evidence shows". ¶6.]
:::
Ok, am conservative.
I'm going to give my thoughts.
So I'm fine with most things between consenting adults. The problem is when there isn't consent and in a larger group, a lack of consensus.
Kids can't consent, and despite claims to the contrary, there's been a couple of trans kids. The issue I see is the amount of push back on passing laws against trans kids. Why on earth do y'all care so much about banning something that isnt happening?
I'm not into sports, but I can see how unfair it is when a bio man fights a bio woman. Even if they're taking mtf hormones, there's still a ton of testorone. Just from a safety aspect, they shouldn't allow bio men in women's boxing or MMA or anything like that. Chess and stuff of that nature doesn't really care about the sex that much. And there's been more a couple of sports women who are against it too. There's a lack of consensus.
As an aside, we were making a ton of progress against gender roles, and now here we are reinforcing them. Can't even wear drag now without being called trans. It's annoying.
Why are you guys so obsessed with labels? Let dudes wear dresses and women wear whatever. You don't need a label for it.
Even if they're taking mtf hormones, there's still a ton of testorone.
This is factually wrong.
Ok, tentatively, that's a small sample size, but if it scales up, transwomen still have higher absolute handgrip strength, lower forced expiratory volume in 1 s:forced vital capacity ratio and lower relative V̇O2max. They still went through male puberty and are reaping the benefits.
You should check out the study the other guy linked.
You should learn basic facts about what you're saying online before using them as basis for your trash political views
But a higher expiratory volume and higher VO2max is better. So they have an advantage in grip strength and a disadvantage in everything else...
Also consider that even within cis women, there's a huge variation in ability. So there are plenty of cis women with a higher grip strength than some trans women.
When we're talking about trans kids, it's about puberty blockers. Why force children to go through puberty that they didn't consent to? Puberty has permanent effects.
You seem misinformed about trans people in sports, but I think the other comment covered it. Also consider that it's just a small minority of people, most of which are not even doing that well in their sport and just want to participate like anyone else.
And as far as labels go, that's because of the culture war.
Can't even wear drag now without being called trans.
The left certainly isn't saying this. That attitude comes from ignorance and not knowing the difference. If you had interacted with the trans community, you would know that we're not putting people in boxes or reinforcing gender roles. Especially when you consider nonbinary people.
Labels are actually important. "cross dressing" and being trans are two completely different things. One is personal expression, while the other is identity. A trans man could wear a dress, for example, and it wouldn't make him less of a man.
Trigger warning: this is a very graphic response. In a bad frame of mind? Emotionally upset easily? Just don't read it.
The thing that conservatives don't understand is that if someone is clearly trans at 14 and they start taking puberty blockers and estrogen, they sometimes wind up looking like Kim Petras. Kim Petras sort of looks slightly trans, but mostly, she just looks like a hot chick. She will not have the same easy life a naturally born hot chick would, but it's going to be much much easier because of what happened when she was an early teenager.
Now let's say you wait until 18, because kids shouldn't be pushed into things. Now you have adams apples, larger brow ridges, and worst of all, there are different midface ratios you can't really correct even with surgery. At a certain point, even will all the estrogen and feminizing surgeries in the world, you will still look like a dude taking estrogen wearing makeup. A person in this situation will have a much harder life. The respectable and admirable Kaitlen Jenner is an example of someone who had tons of money and even then, the facial feminization with all the money in the world can't change certain ratios when someone transitions at a certain age.
Neither person "passes." Kim Petras from certain angles occasionally looks Trans. But if she wore conservative makeup and a conservative outfit, she could go somewhere and do something without getting mean dirty looks.
Do you know what it's like to get mean stares and glares all the time? If you are conservative, you don't. Any mean look inherently makes a person with any normal limbic system feel bad. Do you know how many dirty looks conservatives gives to different looking people every single day? All these conservatives talk about Bible this and Jesus that and protecting children this and that. A lot of children who feel trans blow their brains out, hang themselves, or jump of tall things once they are adults because they didn't get puberty blockers and estrogen before their face looked manly and it would require hundreds of thousands of dollars of plastic surgery to correct and the dirty looks and meanness wear them down and eventually, they are just done.
This is not about protecting children, it's about protecting conservative religious beliefs.
The conservative fear that some woke snowflake mom is going to push her confused depressed kid into chopping of his genitals and pretending to be a woman doesn't line up with reality and it's a flawed argument. Being trans is a hard and miserable road and no parent or kid wants it, it's something that happens, like cancer, that people deal with, but at least with cancer, you get sympathy from everyone, instead of your family disowning you if you are conservative.
I understand the "moderate" perspective on this, but you are totally wrong.
Except for the part about sports. Transgendered people just shouldn't be able to compete in sports or should have their own league. And liberals arguing otherwise detracts credibility from the much more important issue, which is trans kids should be able to get medical care before they get huge adams apples and brow ridges and longer midfaces and sharper cheekbones and wind up much more likely to commit suicide.
The more important part of the equation is being able to use puberty blockers and take estrogen prior to developing even more manly characteristics. Genital surgery could be done as an adult, but that's not actually what conservatives want, they want no medication intervention before 18.
If there are concerns about making young teens who are confused infertile, then conservative religitards can subsidize these people freezing their eggs or sperm, but the reality is not that many people change their minds on this. For every random YouTube special filmed by a hardcore catholic showing a schizophrenic female who regrets lopping off her breasts, you have thousands of women who are now trans men who are less likely to die, but the Catholic documentary filmmakers don't add that in, do they?
Conservatives often point to the horrors of the surgeries. They are horrific. Sometimes if someone reverses their penis and scrotum, hair can grow on the inside of their constructed "vagina" and the whole thing is horrific. But the math is evident: the trans people who do these surgeries are less likely to blow their heads off.
People act like this is an ivory tower debate, but really it's often there are 2 outcomes: outcome 1 is that Billy with a large browridge, adam's apple, and manly cheeks, who doesn't have 150,000 for facial feminization surgery, lays down in front of train tracks at 19 and splat, OR Billy takes puberty blockers and estrogen at 13, becomes Billie, and ends up marrying a mathmatician who doesn't want to have children for some reason and they live happily ever after despite being an unusual couple.
The fake empathy and outrage Christians have neglects to look at the statistics and the actual outcomes and relies on the availability heuristic/bias to make assumptions. It's all fine and well to do such ivory tower debates, unless you're the transgender teen who ends up dead because of it.
I'm going to be an apologist for conservatives for a sec, just for the sake of giving out my theory of mind of these people.
I think this all happens mostly due to the stress trans people are inadvertently causing their parents. When your kid comes out of the closet, this will happen to a parent regardless of how liberal-minded they are. Even if you have no problem with the concept, your kid being trans brings about new kinds of threat scenarios you never had to think about before. If you're a sensible, smart and handsome person like I truly fucking am, you can process it in a few years and come out as not being a 100% asshole towards the issue.
But if your reference group is republican church goers, there's a high probability that such a person just simply does not have the mental or social toolset to process it in any sensible way. They will construct a toxic viewpoint for this issue, strengthen it from outside sources and then start to spread that toxicity.
I think this all happens mostly due to the stress trans people are inadvertently causing their parents. When your kid comes out of the closet, this will happen to a parent regardless of how liberal-minded they are. Even if you have no problem with the concept, your kid being trans brings about new kinds of threat scenarios you never had to think about before. If you’re a sensible, smart and handsome person like I truly fucking am, you can process it in a few years and come out as not being a 100% asshole towards the issue.
I feel like it's more the opposite problem. For the parents, trans people are a vague boogeyman. They've never meant a trans person personally, and they're constantly told that trans people are just waiting to jump them in the bathroom, or at sports, or all sorts of other things, so they've never had to contend with someone they know being trans.
If it was simply stress or threat to the kid, it wouldn't really explain the reaction to disowning them, since most of those aren't about the treatment that their kids would receive for being trans.
If my kid was trans, the only stress it would cause is thinking about how much medical bills we might have.
But I don't have expectations for my kids that I'm imposing on them, so maybe I have less to process.
Yeah my mom talked to me about her mixed feelings when I came out. On one hand she saw I was no longer miserable and was extremely happy about that, but on the other hand she was terrified. I lucked out, she’d gotten involved as an ally to the trans community before I came out to her (and I believe she was actually surprised when I did), but yeah she was very scared for me.
Funny enough one of my first thoughts after realizing I was trans was “fuck my life isn’t going to be easy”, so at least the concern for my safety was something we shared lol
I think you're close to the root of it. The need for a biological legacy is strong no matter any affiliations. Having "non-conforming" children threatens that legacy.
For the groups that inflate this drive, that's all there is. That's the only purpose. No "we as a species".
For the rest of us it might be a little disappointing at the prospect of no grandchildren. But we know that it's ultimately not our decision. And the same outcome could happen regardless of any "conformity".
Yeah, I did certainly want to be able to do something that would've made my child not trans, but I couldn't figure any way to do that so there was just nothing to even try. Also in the same vein on several occasions I wondered whether I had caused this by some action or inaction which is just pointless rumination.
Some of the more delusional churchgoers think they can change these things because they think they have a wizard on their side.
That last sentence put an awful thought in my head and I'm scared to even see if such a thing already exists. But how long before there are religious anti-trans conversion therapy camps. I hate this timeline.
Rural IL here. Full of conservatives.
Nobody here cares if you are trans. Couldn't care less.
Never met a school church shooter either.
Most conservatives I know think it's dangerous to entertain trans ideas in children. They say kids don't know what gender really means because they haven't experienced puberty yet but the most effective time to use hormone blockers is before puberty. So they feel like it's the parents who are encouraging use of hormone therapy for their kids because the parents are brainwashed by left media, and essentially committing child abuse.
Because there are only 2 possibilities:
- Trans people are real and the Bible is a book filled to the brim with bullshit
or
- Trans people are not real but merely EVIL men and women possessed by Satan because god created Adam and Eve, not they and them
They are in fact mutually exclusive. So what do you think the moron cult members will choose, the option that requires deprogramming... or the option that aligns with their stupid bullshit cult beliefs?
I'm pretty sure they just think it's icky.
A lot of conservatives want to simplify life because they have a simple mind.
It's who their owners say to hate, so they hate them. Could be anyone and for no or any reason. They're cultists and they do, say, hate, and fear who they're told to.
Gender and separation of humans based on those lines have been a thing for longer than humans even called themselves "humans", and transpeople threaten that. So it triggers a flight or fight reflex in people who aren't used to the concept.
I find when people know me for awhile and THEN find out I'm trans, their reaction is less "I'm scared", and more "That's neat", but if people find out I'm trans before they get to know me, they will be hostile the whole time.
conservative ideology is built around hate, and thus attracts hateful people, or indoctrinates people susceptible to to such ideology. There must always be some outside group to blame every problem on, and to feel superior to without having to actually be better. Conservatives have enough hate to go around that they're not focused exclusively on trans people, but this flavor of hate is the new hotness for them.
From what I have seen, it seems trans and gay people are used as a "bar." Since these people aren't inclined to be gay or trans they believe themselves to be above the bar they have set. Racism works the same way.
They tried to put their religion into politics and it backfired; now their religion is just random politics with a few supernatural beliefs that do not effect their day to day actions.
I don't encounter a lot of ads but I was just listening to the Economist talk about this one which the trump campaign played over and over again and it struck me as a small window of an answer to your question.
The ad strikes me as cruel but the thrust (and I imagine there's a blend of fact and fiction) is that Harris used tax money to pay for a woman's sex change after being convicted of first degree murder and serving life in prison. They also have Harris saying she was using her power to "push forward the movement and the agenda."
Even for supporters of trans rights, I imagine not everyone loves having to defend using tax money to pay for expensive gender surgery, especially on criminals.
So I could see people, who might otherwise be supportive of trans folks in their own lives, being "against trans people" on an issue framed like this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3BXYjoAzq0&ab_channel=TheJimHeathChannel
Because they tell teenagers that you might accidentally kiss a man and let hormones and immaturity handle the rest.
Trans people give conservatives feelings in their pants and scare and confuse them. They lash out in fear, hatred, and self-loathing.
Prove it
It's on OP to prove. But reasonably most people aren't transphobic considering how big of s topic, if you will, transsexualism had become lately. I don't think most conservatives are transphobic either.
Kind regards, someone who would be very liberal in the US.
Because most people don't actually know any trans people, and find unfamiliar things to be weird and scary.
But also because terrible people have weaponized those feelings for personal political gain. Most people probably wouldn't give a fuck, even if they found them weird, if talking heads weren't stoking the flames of bigotry.
Cause they were told to.
I’ve never met a person against trans people. I talk to lots of people as a Uber driver in Denver. What state do you live in?
I am currently stationed in Chicago. And I have met trans people across the US and none of em have been bad or had a bad attitude they are pretty down to earth and pretty cool.
Well you have to understand everyone takes it as settled science to varying degrees.
Some think theres nothing left to learn, all settled and people need to stop asking questions and just agree. On the other end are those who think its pure fantasy and that, since its not science at all, must be being used as a tool against children.
I'm not sure how big those two ends are, but theres the people in the middle too, who think there is likely something going on here but aren't sold on the current implementation. Some are hesitant and want more time and research. Some are concerned that societal pressure is trumping doctors advice.
Maybe theres some other group I'm not thinking of but either way, the angriest group isnt always the biggest, but will be loudest. That might skew your perceptions of how people generally feel on average.
In my experience and speaking with transphobes I think it’s caused by our current culture of trying to force people to accept them.
Most people in my experience are happy not knowing or ignoring signs that someone is trans or gay. However when you start bringing it up in casual conversation or being overtly flamboyant for lack of a better term people start giving push back on it. I would compare it to the vegan stereotype. No one cares you’re vegan but when you constantly bring it up or try to make every conversation about you being vegan people get annoyed.
We as a society need to accept that racists and transphobes won’t change. You can’t force them to accept anything.
Why would you ask this question on Lemmy. You will get few, if any, legitimate answers. This platform is an echo chamber.
To be fair, every platform is an echo chamber. The only differences are to what degree.
Probably true enough, but I'm sure there are a few that are a mixed bag.
I would agree with this.
Also, for the record, your username is the highlight of my day. Tell me, which ones are lies and which ones are true?
My dear doctor, they're all true. Especially the lies.
Yeah, such a shameful lack of bigots' POV.
Most platforms are echo chambers but this one is a chamber without many conservatives.
Remove the bottom 75% of IQs in the bell curve, then take that group and choose the top 1/3 of the most technologically literate, then you have lemmy
It's just that extremely high intelligence and extreme knowledge about tech happen to correlate with certain views that aren't based on mythological bullshit. But yeah, I guess you could call that an echo chamber?
Fucking lol. Thanks for that.
Because conservatives are mostly dumb, and dumb people don't understand things and won't make an effort to understand things, and people fear what they don't understand. Very simple A-to-C.
Because people don't shut up about it.
I'll try actually answer the question and get hated for it I'm sure rather than circle jerking something to the top. But I think it goes like this.
Imagine you had a ball and a cube. Then everyone agrees the ball is a ball and a cube is a cube. Been like this as long as anyone remembers.
Then suddenly someone comes around and says one of those cubes is special and is actually a ball. Then everyone agrees that person is mental. Years go by and more people start saying that some cubes are balls and you feel like you are losing you mind. You know what a ball is, everyone knows what a ball is! How can anyone say a cube is a ball. People attack you for it. People say you are wrong that you are hateful, horrible but you know! Surely everyone knows this is a joke.
They started painting cubes to look like balls and everyone acts like they are balls. But you know they aren't balls.
You are happy to group them on different measures. Sure some balls and some cubes are red, some are yellow. Both balls and cubes can be spiky, sure balls are more often spiky but there is nothing wrong with a spiky cube. Each to there own. Most cubes are smooth but some balls are smooth. That's fine.
There are a million and one ways to group these shapes. But at the end of the day a cube is a cube and a ball is a ball. Anything else is madness and you're not standing for it. You can group them however you want, choose whatever is the most important, fine is doesn't matter. But don't say something that is obviously a cube is a ball and what is obviously a ball a cube. You can't change the definition of a cube to be what that shapes feels it is, that's meaningless. It defeats the purpose of the word. Sure make a new word but don't use that word.
In regards to the question at hand how so that a shit analogy?
But at the end of the day a cube is a cube and a ball is a ball. Anything else is madness and you’re not standing for it.
This is the crux of where you are wrong. There's more than just cubes and balls, but because of society, stigma and restrictive laws in some countries, everyone has to try and fit themselves into a cube or a ball, even though they might be egg shaped.
genders are not defined by shape of the human but by biology
What?
At this point I'm assuming that loads of them either want to be trans, want to have sex with a trans person, but they feel they can't do either because they were told it's evil
It's the same as the gay hating, any guy very visibly hating gays always ends up snorting cocaine from a gay escort dick.
Why does it seem most people, mainly conservatives, against Trans people?
I think it's important to establish the validity of the claim, and the assumptions being made, since you cited no sources, nor did you provide any definitions, nor did you specify any assumptions; I will presume that by "conservative", you are referring to American Republicans.
Why does it seem most people [...][are] against Trans people?
It does not appear that "most people" (I assume you mean "the majority of people") are "against trans people" (I'm not entirely sure exactly what you mean by this, so I will assume it means not being in favor of protecting trans people from discrimination) [1.2][1.1].
Why does it seem [...] conservatives [...][are] against Trans people?
It does seem that the majority of Republicans are against trans protections [1.1].
ADDENDUM (2024-11-23T06:49Z): Could someone who's downvoting this please tell me why they are doing so? I'm rather confused about what the rationale could be. I didn't even state any opinions; I was only fact checking. Was I perhaps too abrasive sounding? I wasn't intending to be rude.
References
- "Americans’ Complex Views on Gender Identity and Transgender Issues". Author: Kim Parker, Juliana Menasce Horowitz, Anna Brown. Publisher: Pew Research Center. Published: 2022-06-28. Accessed: 2024-11-23T02:35Z. https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2022/06/28/americans-complex-views-on-gender-identity-and-transgender-issues/.
-
:::
Among the many factors, I think that we shouldn't lose sights on the fact that statistically there is a percentage of any population who has no "normal" sexual orientation. This means that there a percentage of conservative/religious fundamentalists who are non-heterosexual CIS in the closet, who fight against sexual diversity to defend their chosen belief structure. There cannot be queers, thus they are an abomination that must be stamped out.
because they're gay and weird or christian and dumb
the existence of GNC people undermines the thin facade of identity that people construct based on their assigned gender roles. they lash out against internal discomfort
Because the science ia highly debated and we are yet to come to a real consensus on the issue. From what ive seen most people really dont gives a fuck about being anti trans they give a fuck about trans intervention with children.
What is the ideology you’re talking about? I’m not sure I follow your example, are you comparing suicidal ideation to being trans and suggesting the same treatment?
You’re fucking gross
pretty trasphobic community here.. blocked.
If I remember correctly uvalde was a trans person, but most of the time its just people using one good thing about themselves to justify being horrible. Think holier-than-thou type shit.
Uvalde shooter was not. https://www.bbc.com/news/61607042
It was Nashville, not Uvalde.
Off topic but it's quite fucked that there are so many of these that we mix them up ooof
You are parroting a lie
edit hey dumbasses, you can look it up for yourselves, the uvalde shooter was not trans and there was never anything real even suggesting that he was
They just got the exact shooting wrong, which can happen with the sheer amount of school shootings in the US.
Damn if only I acknowledged somehow that my memory was imperfect and I may be wrong, maybe by saying smth like "if I remember correctly".
well it's kind of your responsibility to fact check that kind of thing before repeating it, no? regardless you're not the one I called a dumbass, it was the clowns downvoting me for stating a fact.
Were I presenting it as a definite fact yes, but I was presenting it as a possible thing that I was pretty sure had happened. Also, I know you weren't talking about me with the edit I didn't even look at it while typing my reply.
Edit: misspelled were as we're, fixed it

