Are they more uncomfortable with me making my own healthcare decisions than with a president who rapes children? I’m not going anywhere, no matter what either party says. Everyone has to deal with that. Appeasing transphobes will only make them worse, and there are more important issues.
I am not going to work towards a world where people feel okay being less comfortable with me. Should we cave on race to appease the people who are just a bit uncomfortable around Black people? I am a nonnegotiable part of this world; President Newsom is not.
You may need allies who are less comfortable with you than you'd like, if you want to stop people who want to eradicate you. Or you can wait for perfection but then own it. Funny thing you mention the Black people. Slavery was ended by quite a lot of people who were racist as heck.
If this conversation is happening, I’m part of it. If it’s disadvantageous for trans people to point out that we care about our healthcare, then maybe spend less time talking about us. Changing the subject works well for the child rapist president, so maybe that should be the strategy we adopt.
There is a test case for human decency in every generation. In the 1930s, the test case was the Jews; in the 1960s, it was civil rights. Now it’s transgender rights.
Then you should have a good deep look at who formed coalitions with whom in each of these instances. It also kinda involved using enemy weapons against them and a lot of ethnic cleansing. The longer you wait for someone pure to fight while shunning effective weapons, the worse it will get.
I don’t think you read my posts. I don’t care if he is pure. I don’t care what he thinks. I care that he is willing to persecute a vulnerable group to get elected. There is no historical precedent where this ends well for anyone.
Finally, slavery was not ended by offering compromises on slavery. I don’t care what Gavin Newsom feels or thinks. I care about what he says he will do.
there's your problem slavery was not abolished - exemptions for "criminals" watching 13th by Ava DuVernay a few years back and it stuck how white liberals celebrate the abolition of slavery while living in a society that accepts mass incarceration, and then forced labour, of black people
Aware of this. But chattel slavery was ended. Jim Crow and sharecroppers was an early new form. Before ‘the war on drugs’. We have to oppose each new form as it comes along.
Indeed. And it wasn't. Each time, a refaced racism replaced the last one. Notice, the ethnic groups ICE, DHS and NG target In an emergency, sometimes you only have the least worst option The immediate danger is Trump and the decades long erosion of norms, institutions and liberty by the right
I accept that, but I am not convinced yet that Gavin Newsom is the least worst option.
I hope you are right, Newsom is far from good let alone perfect These authoritarians are not restrained by norms, conventions or laws, and now they are allowed unfettered power by a mix of infiltration of institutions and the utterly useless Dem leadership You will have to use the weapons you can
Lincoln was offering a compromise. Heck, even the Emancipation had a huge compromise right there leaving slavery in place for states that remained in Union until the end of war. You'd reject Lincoln, Grant et al and wait while complaining nobody does anything.
How is Gavin Newsom offering a compromise to transgender people?
Actually, when he was campaigning, Lincoln was understood to be an abolitionist. That’s one of the reasons the South seceded. In office, he was more pragmatic. are you trying to say that you think that Gavin Newsom will be the opposite? – will campaign as a pragmatist and be an idealist in office?
Separately, it’s not that I want people to be trans positive, but I’m not going to vote for anybody who cares in advance that this simple human right is something they are willing to sacrifice.
I am not in fact transgender. I am an ally. It’s quite funny that you assume that I must be trans if I take up a trans positive position.
bsky.app/profile/govp...