It really depends on the term. The insane/stupid Third Way memo wants us to avoid "LGBTQ", "Overton Window" and "Body shaming." Come on. The right constantly talks about "subverting norms" (e.g., Last Jedi). There are no alt terms for "dead naming" or "cis" so that's just erasing trans people.
Literally their memo has nothing to do with winning elections or talking to voters, as no one uses most of these terms with voters. They are trying to ban speech that specifically attacks and disempowers Third Way in intramural debates far away from campaigns and electoral messaging.
When you use “unhoused people“ in the name of legislation and you go on a fight the “oligarchy” tour and you have multiple Dems talking about “birthing people“ they are in fact using these terms with voters - and awareness spreads because you have an opposition determined to make sure voters know
Who uses "unhoused" or "birthing" people on the campaign trail outside of deep blue areas? This is mostly academic/NGO space language, especially the latter. But in the case of "unhoused" versus "homeless" i very much doubt there is any evidence showing harmful electoral effects there.
I don't disagree that NGOs should be more careful in their demands of campaigns on both policy and language, but third ways memo is an absurd overreach utterly unsupported by data.
This is correct, Democrats need to talk like normal people in order to win elections, but Third Way has a political agenda here and I don’t agree with it. But most importantly, yes, where would we be if ACLU didn’t make Harris answer the question about trans prisoners. Biden notably skipped it.
And one lesson for NGOs is that candidates will just skip their questionnaires next time if they're doing that sort of thing
But will they skip it? I’m extremely concerned that Dem elected are listening to consultants both too far to the left and too far to the right and neither faction is in touch with reality.
More people should have taken road trips across the USA. Maybe I should be saying it in the present tense.
Well, this Canadian here sure won't do that for at least the next 20 years.
Most of these posts, I swear, come from dorms and group apartments
What works for them will not work for you
I dont know what that even means. If a republican deadnames a trans person, I already know if I want to talk to voters about that I have to explain the attack on their dignity and personal choice, not just rely on the term. But that also doesnt mean abandoning mainstreaming the term over time.
Normal people have no idea wtf you are talking about. No one talks like this
Talks like what? If a Republican intentionally uses trans person's former name, what is your plan for how to talk about it? You can avoid the term "deadname" if you like, say, in a commercial. But also, language does change and new terms arise. In 20 years "deadname" will be widely understood.
I'd say, wtf is wrong with you. You picking on a trans person like your in high school, stop being a douche and act like an adult.
Picking on them by doing what? Cmon man. Explain it.
I don't need to explain it. We all know, they know. Why on earth do you think it's effective to start explaining shit like life is a masters course in gender studies. WAKE UP WE ARE IN A FASCIST COUNTRY.
Yeah that's what I thought. "Deadnaming" isnt masters course in gender studies stuff. It isnt fully mainstream yet, but it is getting there. You can paraphrase and talk around it but it's inefficient.
keep talking efficiently, everyone has tuned you out, and while you were blabbering they started following a fascist.
Let me know the last time "deadnaming" was used in voter facing communications, don quixote.
OK but can we kill land acknowledgements? I thought that performative bullshit was dead already
My point is using this preferred language is inefficient for gaining votes.
Yes, my point.
We can hope.
The alt term for "cis" is not trans - if the question naturally comes up. The alt term for "deadnaming" is "rude".