5 ms·

Political influence isn’t going to align if two sides of the country are irrevocably misaligned on some fundamentals (racism, LGBT etc.). There’s no middle grou

Political influence isn’t going to align if two sides of the country are irrevocably misaligned on some fundamentals (racism, LGBT etc.). There’s no middle ground (mainly LGBT) on these issues so it’s going to have to come down to a pseudo civil war with one side prevailing.

hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
As a gay person, this seems fundamentally wrong to me. There was even more distance among the parties on most LGBT issues 25 years ago, but the ability of the parties to compromise on anything is much, much worse now than it was then. I also think there is much more "crossover" on LGBT issues than one may believe. Tons of Republicans are pro-gay marriage, and tons of Democrats have real concerns about allowing trans women to compete in women's divisions in sports.
- huytersd 3y ago
  The trans thing is the deal breaker when it comes to the right. We never saw massive resistance to gay anything for the last decade or so.
  - Smoosh 3y ago
    I think that the right lost the battle over gay rights as general attitudes had become accepting of them over the past 3-5 decades, but they don't want to lose the war so they are digging in over rights for transgender people.
    - huytersd 3y ago
      I feel it’s a little more than that. The right have never accepted feminized men and trans is taking it to its furthest conclusion. I genuinely believe the right doesn’t care about manly men fucking each other.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - throwaway38937 3y ago
      [flagged]
zzozzo 3y ago
There's definitely middle ground that could be negotiated if the will was there. For example, regarding the T (of LGBT), a liberal stance on people presenting how they want, and making it unlawful to discriminate against them for it. But at the same time, protecting single-sex spaces rather than redefining them in terms of "gender identity", and not punishing others for exercising freedom of speech and belief. So if Bob wants to call himself Brenda, wear a frock and make-up, and take drugs to grow breasts, then that's fine and he shouldn't be fired from his job for doing so. But this doesn't give him access to women's spaces, and if any of his colleagues don't want to refer to him as "she" then they shouldn't be censured for doing so either. This stance also protects LGB who may want to organize same-sex groups, such as lesbian speed dating or gay men's saunas, without having individuals of the opposite sex imposing themselves for self-identity reasons.
- huytersd 3y ago
  If the prevailing notion is Bob is playing dress up as a woman I don’t think there would ever be a problem with the right. The left would never agree with that.
  - zzozzo 3y ago
    I think it depends on which factions of the right and the left. As I understand it, left-wing radical feminists mostly already hold that view. And some on the socially conservative right may still object to Bob/Brenda teaching their children, for example. However I do believe this position, or one very similar to it, could be enough of a middle-ground compromise to satisfy most people.
  - tarsinge 3y ago
    That's not what I got from the parent. Besides, everyone is dressing up one way or another depending on the situation. The problem is putting all your identity into it. And conversely also imposing on others that some characteristics you find important in your own belief system should be part of their identity. Extreme left and extreme right both have issues with that.
- crooked-v 3y ago
TaylorAlexander 3y ago
That’s how they get us. Divide and conquer. The thing is that it’s really the politicians riling up the vocal members of their base. Surveys of most republicans show that they don’t like the extreme focus on trans people. There’s lots of common ground, if we cut away the ideology, on things like labor rights and jobs. The politicians amp up the rhetoric on LGBTQ issues because it gets people upset, but it’s really not an issue that affects most people’s lives outside of LGBTQ people directly.
torginus 3y ago
How true is this? I thought that being openly racist or anti-gay is a political suicide for both sides of the US political spectrum.

hn_throwaway_99 3y ago

As a gay person, this seems fundamentally wrong to me. There was even more distance among the parties on most LGBT issues 25 years ago, but the ability of the parties to compromise on anything is much, much worse now than it was then. I also think there is much more "crossover" on LGBT issues than one may believe. Tons of Republicans are pro-gay marriage, and tons of Democrats have real concerns about allowing trans women to compete in women's divisions in sports.

huytersd 3y ago
The trans thing is the deal breaker when it comes to the right. We never saw massive resistance to gay anything for the last decade or so.
- Smoosh 3y ago
  I think that the right lost the battle over gay rights as general attitudes had become accepting of them over the past 3-5 decades, but they don't want to lose the war so they are digging in over rights for transgender people.
  - huytersd 3y ago
    I feel it’s a little more than that. The right have never accepted feminized men and trans is taking it to its furthest conclusion. I genuinely believe the right doesn’t care about manly men fucking each other.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - throwaway38937 3y ago
    [flagged]

zzozzo 3y ago

There's definitely middle ground that could be negotiated if the will was there. For example, regarding the T (of LGBT), a liberal stance on people presenting how they want, and making it unlawful to discriminate against them for it. But at the same time, protecting single-sex spaces rather than redefining them in terms of "gender identity", and not punishing others for exercising freedom of speech and belief. So if Bob wants to call himself Brenda, wear a frock and make-up, and take drugs to grow breasts, then that's fine and he shouldn't be fired from his job for doing so. But this doesn't give him access to women's spaces, and if any of his colleagues don't want to refer to him as "she" then they shouldn't be censured for doing so either. This stance also protects LGB who may want to organize same-sex groups, such as lesbian speed dating or gay men's saunas, without having individuals of the opposite sex imposing themselves for self-identity reasons.

huytersd 3y ago
If the prevailing notion is Bob is playing dress up as a woman I don’t think there would ever be a problem with the right. The left would never agree with that.
- zzozzo 3y ago
  I think it depends on which factions of the right and the left. As I understand it, left-wing radical feminists mostly already hold that view. And some on the socially conservative right may still object to Bob/Brenda teaching their children, for example. However I do believe this position, or one very similar to it, could be enough of a middle-ground compromise to satisfy most people.
- tarsinge 3y ago
  That's not what I got from the parent. Besides, everyone is dressing up one way or another depending on the situation. The problem is putting all your identity into it. And conversely also imposing on others that some characteristics you find important in your own belief system should be part of their identity. Extreme left and extreme right both have issues with that.
crooked-v 3y ago

TaylorAlexander 3y ago

That’s how they get us. Divide and conquer. The thing is that it’s really the politicians riling up the vocal members of their base. Surveys of most republicans show that they don’t like the extreme focus on trans people. There’s lots of common ground, if we cut away the ideology, on things like labor rights and jobs. The politicians amp up the rhetoric on LGBTQ issues because it gets people upset, but it’s really not an issue that affects most people’s lives outside of LGBTQ people directly.

torginus 3y ago

How true is this? I thought that being openly racist or anti-gay is a political suicide for both sides of the US political spectrum.