CNN turned a 2019 Harris answer about whether transgender people should receive necessary medical care when in government custody into an engagement-bait trifecta of hate.
It amazes me how many people think they can find a “centrist” position on trans rights.
Some people need to step back and accept that the doctors and nurses and psychiatrists that actually work with trans patients, and the trans patients themselves, might have a better understanding of their medical needs than some random person looking for a “compromise”. No, you can’t half-ass human rights. You can’t “both-sides” whether or not trans people have rights.
Hell, the whole "puberty blockers until 18" thing is already a compromise that isn't in the patient's best interest when they should be put on hormones once they've been diagnosed, with blockers only used very early.
What's even weirder are the measures that bar all gender affirming care, including puberty blockers, before 18. The whole point of those medications is to allow for time for patient certainty without generating the extra stress that experiencing puberty would cause in a trans person.
I say that knowing that most trans folks know they are trans well before 18, but note it because these measures essentially deny the use of puberty blockers until AFTER puberty is at least almost completed., which is kind of like stepping on the brake after you've already hit the wall.
Which is weird. I mean, it's thoroughly stupid, but yeah, weird.
You don't understaaaaand! They don't want more dead trans people! They want more dead misguided straight cis people in need of conversion therapy to free them of their ROGD-inspired, left-wing driven, delusion! Totally different!! They're still dead, of course, but it's totally different!!
Okay, still weird but in a totally different way!!
The vast majority of teen breast tissue reduction surgeries are for cis teen girls wanting breast reductions, and cis teen boys with gynecomastia. I guess gender affirming surgeries are fine as long as they are not for trans people.
I had a friend way back in the 50s who had breast reduction surgery because her breasts grew so huge that she literally had trouble walking. It isn't just image that drives the need for surgery.
My wife had a breast reduction at 19 for similar reasons of physical comfort. Her reasons for having that surgery are no more nor less valid than anyone having a similar surgery to relieve psychological discomfort, be they trans or, vastly more commonly, not.
Am I understanding this? CNN so badly wants to get something, anything, on Kamala Harris that they'll go back to 2019 and try to spin a lack of bigotry and marginalization into some radical far left position that should be disdained? Really?
These people really just want us to die, don't they? They know denying trans people healthcare causes people to die. I can only conclude they want that. Trans people? Not worth the money to keep alive. Prisoners? Not worth the money to keep alive. Immigrants? Not worth the money to keep alive.
Trans immigrants in prisons dying? Sounds REALLY familiar...
"Trans immigrants in prisons" I find it so amusing that Trump basically quoted me in the debate, but also did it so badly that it just sounded like the nonsensical talking points word soup that it is!
This entire argument is stupid. Transgender people are a very small percentage of the population. How many people are actually getting trans care that are detained? Probably a drop in the bucket. And of those how many are actually getting those surgeries? Probably not even half of a half of a drop in the bucket.
Honestly the tax payers pay more for things like heart medication, blood thinners, diabetics medication, various cancers, women’s health related things than they ever will pay for any trans healthcare. YET they are crying about the very hypothetical POSSIBILITY of a detained trans person having surgery. It’s so rare a circumstance that we don’t even have data on it. You would think that if it were such a huge financial burden that there would be numbers. It’s a NON-ISSUE like everything else they cry about.
It’s simple: fascism is likely to take over here, and the most cowardly scum are looking to orient themselves to thriving within it. The really-existing values are maximizing money, status, and power within totalitarian institutions (ie, corporations). That coexists just fine with fascism.
I also found this disappointing. I looked into the case. Had some tragic details including sexual abuse in the prison. The decision -- besides noting relying on a single decision to vote against someone is usually wrong anyways -- appeared to me reasonable. The Republican demonization only underlines that Ossoff's vote is ... well's it's wrong.
I noticed something else in looking at the link. In the right-hand column under "Most Popular" appeared this headline: "Trump’s escalating threats alarm his opponents ."
Another failure of our news media is the insistence on fitting everything into an binary "supporters and opponents" framework. Because - well - I mean - shouldn't that alarm everyone??
I suspect there is another reason in addition to transphobia: The media has been unable to dredge up some anti-Harris "scandal" with all the rush of hot pursuit, the chance to break some facet of the "expanding questions," the opportunity for a byline on the front page, that entails.
They haven't found anything worse than "she shifted her position such-and-such," which even they have trouble making into anything more than the traditional "pivot to the center" for the general election which even Kaczynski can't avoid acknowledging.
In other words, they're frustrated and will latch onto anything that seems - or, rather, that can be made to seem - something to make eyebrows twitch. If it can be related to TAXPAYER MONEY along with, no matter how tangentially, SEX, so much the better.
I wonder how Kaczynski would react to a news article about her reporting headlined something like "CNN's Kaczynski Suggests Government Should Deny Medical Care to Disfavored Groups" attached to an article describing her seeming shock ("'She wrote that?' she asked incredulously.") at Kamala Harris suggesting that provision of "medically necessary care" for people under the government's control should not be denied based on an individual's personal characteristics. "Kaczynski called the idea 'incredible.'"
The rise of the religious right to such amazing heights is clearly behind the anti-trans movement. "Man and Woman He Created them" says the Bible. Therefore it much be IMPOSSIBLE for one sex to want to change to another.
Thing is, the Bible doesn't say "Man and Woman he created them, man with a dick and woman with boobs." Far as I know the nether parts of His Own Image are not anywhere described; though I'm not a Bible Thumper I HAVE read a good deal of the OT.
So, Bible Thumpers: are you actually saying that God couldn't have created someone with one set of parts but actually meant them to have a different set? Just because, as you frequently point out, "He" can.
There is enough collective expertise to solve a wide range of society’s problems, but it is easier to blame those with medical needs than it is to muster the political will to address health issues using the aforementioned expertise. Those wealthy enough to afford their own armies would rather kill people because it’s cheaper and faster than helping.
It amazes me how many people think they can find a “centrist” position on trans rights.
Some people need to step back and accept that the doctors and nurses and psychiatrists that actually work with trans patients, and the trans patients themselves, might have a better understanding of their medical needs than some random person looking for a “compromise”. No, you can’t half-ass human rights. You can’t “both-sides” whether or not trans people have rights.
Precisely. Well stated.
Hell, the whole "puberty blockers until 18" thing is already a compromise that isn't in the patient's best interest when they should be put on hormones once they've been diagnosed, with blockers only used very early.
What's even weirder are the measures that bar all gender affirming care, including puberty blockers, before 18. The whole point of those medications is to allow for time for patient certainty without generating the extra stress that experiencing puberty would cause in a trans person.
I say that knowing that most trans folks know they are trans well before 18, but note it because these measures essentially deny the use of puberty blockers until AFTER puberty is at least almost completed., which is kind of like stepping on the brake after you've already hit the wall.
Which is weird. I mean, it's thoroughly stupid, but yeah, weird.
It's only weird if your goal isn't more dead trans people. 🤷
You don't understaaaaand! They don't want more dead trans people! They want more dead misguided straight cis people in need of conversion therapy to free them of their ROGD-inspired, left-wing driven, delusion! Totally different!! They're still dead, of course, but it's totally different!!
Okay, still weird but in a totally different way!!
The vast majority of teen breast tissue reduction surgeries are for cis teen girls wanting breast reductions, and cis teen boys with gynecomastia. I guess gender affirming surgeries are fine as long as they are not for trans people.
7x as many elective breast reduction surgeries are performed on cis girls. as are performed on trans patients.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38896845/
I had a friend way back in the 50s who had breast reduction surgery because her breasts grew so huge that she literally had trouble walking. It isn't just image that drives the need for surgery.
My wife had a breast reduction at 19 for similar reasons of physical comfort. Her reasons for having that surgery are no more nor less valid than anyone having a similar surgery to relieve psychological discomfort, be they trans or, vastly more commonly, not.
Am I understanding this? CNN so badly wants to get something, anything, on Kamala Harris that they'll go back to 2019 and try to spin a lack of bigotry and marginalization into some radical far left position that should be disdained? Really?
These people really just want us to die, don't they? They know denying trans people healthcare causes people to die. I can only conclude they want that. Trans people? Not worth the money to keep alive. Prisoners? Not worth the money to keep alive. Immigrants? Not worth the money to keep alive.
Trans immigrants in prisons dying? Sounds REALLY familiar...
The world is a better, brighter place with you in it and I’m glad you’re here. CNN can consume an entire satchel of Richards.
"Trans immigrants in prisons" I find it so amusing that Trump basically quoted me in the debate, but also did it so badly that it just sounded like the nonsensical talking points word soup that it is!
This entire argument is stupid. Transgender people are a very small percentage of the population. How many people are actually getting trans care that are detained? Probably a drop in the bucket. And of those how many are actually getting those surgeries? Probably not even half of a half of a drop in the bucket.
Honestly the tax payers pay more for things like heart medication, blood thinners, diabetics medication, various cancers, women’s health related things than they ever will pay for any trans healthcare. YET they are crying about the very hypothetical POSSIBILITY of a detained trans person having surgery. It’s so rare a circumstance that we don’t even have data on it. You would think that if it were such a huge financial burden that there would be numbers. It’s a NON-ISSUE like everything else they cry about.
Yup. All of this. It's all a distraction, so people won't notice the land being sold out from under them to the global widget-manufacturing concern.
Absolutely infuriating.
It’s simple: fascism is likely to take over here, and the most cowardly scum are looking to orient themselves to thriving within it. The really-existing values are maximizing money, status, and power within totalitarian institutions (ie, corporations). That coexists just fine with fascism.
I also found this disappointing. I looked into the case. Had some tragic details including sexual abuse in the prison. The decision -- besides noting relying on a single decision to vote against someone is usually wrong anyways -- appeared to me reasonable. The Republican demonization only underlines that Ossoff's vote is ... well's it's wrong.
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4766255-ossoff-republicans-judicial-nominee-biden/
I noticed something else in looking at the link. In the right-hand column under "Most Popular" appeared this headline: "Trump’s escalating threats alarm his opponents ."
Another failure of our news media is the insistence on fitting everything into an binary "supporters and opponents" framework. Because - well - I mean - shouldn't that alarm everyone??
Great post. Thanks for sharing!
Fox Lite.
I suspect there is another reason in addition to transphobia: The media has been unable to dredge up some anti-Harris "scandal" with all the rush of hot pursuit, the chance to break some facet of the "expanding questions," the opportunity for a byline on the front page, that entails.
They haven't found anything worse than "she shifted her position such-and-such," which even they have trouble making into anything more than the traditional "pivot to the center" for the general election which even Kaczynski can't avoid acknowledging.
In other words, they're frustrated and will latch onto anything that seems - or, rather, that can be made to seem - something to make eyebrows twitch. If it can be related to TAXPAYER MONEY along with, no matter how tangentially, SEX, so much the better.
I wonder how Kaczynski would react to a news article about her reporting headlined something like "CNN's Kaczynski Suggests Government Should Deny Medical Care to Disfavored Groups" attached to an article describing her seeming shock ("'She wrote that?' she asked incredulously.") at Kamala Harris suggesting that provision of "medically necessary care" for people under the government's control should not be denied based on an individual's personal characteristics. "Kaczynski called the idea 'incredible.'"
The rise of the religious right to such amazing heights is clearly behind the anti-trans movement. "Man and Woman He Created them" says the Bible. Therefore it much be IMPOSSIBLE for one sex to want to change to another.
Thing is, the Bible doesn't say "Man and Woman he created them, man with a dick and woman with boobs." Far as I know the nether parts of His Own Image are not anywhere described; though I'm not a Bible Thumper I HAVE read a good deal of the OT.
So, Bible Thumpers: are you actually saying that God couldn't have created someone with one set of parts but actually meant them to have a different set? Just because, as you frequently point out, "He" can.
There is enough collective expertise to solve a wide range of society’s problems, but it is easier to blame those with medical needs than it is to muster the political will to address health issues using the aforementioned expertise. Those wealthy enough to afford their own armies would rather kill people because it’s cheaper and faster than helping.