4 ms·

Extremist positions on trans issues. To quote Sam Harris: "Congratulations, Democrats. You have found the most annoying thing in the fucking galaxy and hung it

Extremist positions on trans issues. To quote Sam Harris: "Congratulations, Democrats. You have found the most annoying thing in the fucking galaxy and hung it around your necks."[1] [1] https://samharris.substack.com/p/the-reckoning https://samharris.substack.com/p/the-reckoning

Trasmatta 2y ago
Harris said almost nothing about trans issues during the election. You're attempting to rewrite history if you're claiming it was somehow a core tenant of her campaign. That was entirely propaganda by the opposing party.
- blindriver 2y ago
  Are voters only supposed to limit their votes about things candidates say during the election? If so does that mean voting against Trump for Jan 6 insurrection was wrong? Or can voters vote against Harris because of policies she has endorsed before the election?
  - skyyler 2y ago
    >If so does that mean voting against Trump for Jan 6 insurrection was wrong? Well, no, because he campaigned on that. Including pardons for people that participated.
    - loeg 2y ago
      It is reasonable for voters to consider politicians' behavior before the most recent election cycle and ridiculous to say voters should have ignored Harris' earlier statements. (And I say that as someone who voted for Harris.)
      - skyyler 2y ago
        Oh, no, I definitely agree with you on that, was just pointing out that specific premise is factually incorrect.
- AlexandrB 2y ago
  In various outlets she said she would change little from Biden's administration. And of course there's the classic: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/harris-gender-surgeries-jail/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/harris-gender-surgeries-ja... Are you suggesting that Harris would have reeled in some of the most outrageous policies on this issue? She said no such thing so the reasonable assumption anyone would make is that it would be business as usual. Not talking about it is the problem.
  - skyyler 2y ago
    What exactly is the issue with prisoners getting medical care?
- jl6 2y ago
  She was loudly accused of having extreme positions on a hot button issue. Saying nothing was tantamount to admitting the accusation was true. That's how the court of public opinion works.
  - _t9ow 2y ago
    > She was loudly accused of having extreme positions on a hot button issue. She was accused of many things in bad faith, e.g. not being Black, being a Marxist, being a communist, and more. Spending time and effort to address every single one of these would have been tantamount to allowing her opponent to dictate her campaign.
    - jl6 2y ago
      None of those things had attack ads with this kind of impact: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_is_for_they/them https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_is_for_they/them It was and is an important issue to a lot of voters and by ignoring it she let her opponent explain her position for her.
pjc50 2y ago
I don't think that leaving trans people alone is extremist.
- gadders 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - sjsdaiuasgdia 2y ago
    Exactly how have trans people affected your life, directly?
    - gadders 2y ago
      I have worked with (born male) non-binary people who alternate between wearing male and female clothes. I have seen them enter the female toilets, and win awards for women. But tbh, this is a daft question. It's like saying you can't have a policy position on gun control unless someone has shot at you.
      - hobs 2y ago
        Dang you saw a trans person? How many trans people are the equivalent of a loaded weapon? Because that's the completely bonkers question that somehow is being equivocated here - that someone wearing different clothes or identifying differently is a potential harm just waiting to get you... how exactly? Did you deserve the woman only award? Would you assume that identity to get that award? Are you saying that people dishonestly assume trans identities because its an easy way to assume power in our society? Are you a serious person?
        gadders 2y ago
        [flagged]
        bobalob 2y ago
        This article is a good read, it explains why it's problematic to bestow upon men awards that were intended for women: https://www.filia.org.uk/latest-news/2018/9/21/does-the-apparel-oft-proclaim-the-man https://www.filia.org.uk/latest-news/2018/9/21/does-the-appa...
LastTrain 2y ago
And that impacts you on a daily basis exactly how? Think long and hard about why that would even begin to bother you. Not to mention is was barely a passing side issue for Harris
- djohnston 2y ago
  Are you implying that people should only vote on things which they encounter in their day-to-day lived experience? That's silly and not how the world works. Why are you mad about Gaza? You aren't getting JDAMs dropped on your roof, are you? How does Gaza impact you on a daily basis? Harris failed to distance herself from positions that are deeply unpopular with the majority of Americans (e.g. sex changes for illegal immigrants). That's all there is to it. If you want to step away from this particular issue, she failed to distance herself from the Biden administration's policies. There's a pretty famous clip of her failing to answer a question to that point, definitely on the youtubes.
  - LastTrain 2y ago
    I tend to care about policies that don't impact me personally when they harm other people. I'm a natural born citizen, I'm not going to get deported with out process, but I still care about that. I'm not in grade school, so I'm not going to be a victim of a school shooting, but I still care about that. If it is a policy that doesn't impact me personally, but benefits someone else, yeah I tend to not give a shit. Why would I be against a position that has no impact on me whatsoever when it only meant to help someone else as in the case with civil rights?
    - djohnston 2y ago
      > If it is a policy that doesn't impact me personally, but benefits someone else, yeah I tend to not give a shit. You're excluding a key point - the policy often benefits one party at the cost of another. You mentioned immigration and that's a great example of this sort of pathological empathy that has infected the left. There's a cheap and fleeting sense of virtue attained when you champion illegal immigration and decry deportations. You post photos of mothers and their children crying at the border because the human trafficking organisations are having a hard time getting them across nowadays. But it's important to remember the negative pressure illegal immigrants place on wages and why there's a gross cabal of large corporations, lobbies, and affiliated NGOs, who virtue signal immigration as a means to lower their labor costs. It's important to remember the entire pipeline of illegal immigrants is owned and operated by extremely violent cartels - humans are now their most valuable product. Your desperate craving for that high of in-group acceptance is propping this up. It's not that you're empathetic - you just don't care about the negatively impacted party. Nothing new under the sun.

Trasmatta 2y ago

Harris said almost nothing about trans issues during the election. You're attempting to rewrite history if you're claiming it was somehow a core tenant of her campaign. That was entirely propaganda by the opposing party.

blindriver 2y ago
Are voters only supposed to limit their votes about things candidates say during the election? If so does that mean voting against Trump for Jan 6 insurrection was wrong? Or can voters vote against Harris because of policies she has endorsed before the election?
- skyyler 2y ago
  >If so does that mean voting against Trump for Jan 6 insurrection was wrong? Well, no, because he campaigned on that. Including pardons for people that participated.
  - loeg 2y ago
    It is reasonable for voters to consider politicians' behavior before the most recent election cycle and ridiculous to say voters should have ignored Harris' earlier statements. (And I say that as someone who voted for Harris.)
    - skyyler 2y ago
      Oh, no, I definitely agree with you on that, was just pointing out that specific premise is factually incorrect.
AlexandrB 2y ago
In various outlets she said she would change little from Biden's administration. And of course there's the classic: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/harris-gender-surgeries-jail/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/harris-gender-surgeries-ja... Are you suggesting that Harris would have reeled in some of the most outrageous policies on this issue? She said no such thing so the reasonable assumption anyone would make is that it would be business as usual. Not talking about it is the problem.
- skyyler 2y ago
  What exactly is the issue with prisoners getting medical care?
jl6 2y ago
She was loudly accused of having extreme positions on a hot button issue. Saying nothing was tantamount to admitting the accusation was true. That's how the court of public opinion works.
- _t9ow 2y ago
  > She was loudly accused of having extreme positions on a hot button issue. She was accused of many things in bad faith, e.g. not being Black, being a Marxist, being a communist, and more. Spending time and effort to address every single one of these would have been tantamount to allowing her opponent to dictate her campaign.
  - jl6 2y ago
    None of those things had attack ads with this kind of impact: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_is_for_they/them https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_is_for_they/them It was and is an important issue to a lot of voters and by ignoring it she let her opponent explain her position for her.

pjc50 2y ago

I don't think that leaving trans people alone is extremist.

gadders 2y ago
[flagged]
- sjsdaiuasgdia 2y ago
  Exactly how have trans people affected your life, directly?
  - gadders 2y ago
    I have worked with (born male) non-binary people who alternate between wearing male and female clothes. I have seen them enter the female toilets, and win awards for women. But tbh, this is a daft question. It's like saying you can't have a policy position on gun control unless someone has shot at you.
    - hobs 2y ago
      Dang you saw a trans person? How many trans people are the equivalent of a loaded weapon? Because that's the completely bonkers question that somehow is being equivocated here - that someone wearing different clothes or identifying differently is a potential harm just waiting to get you... how exactly? Did you deserve the woman only award? Would you assume that identity to get that award? Are you saying that people dishonestly assume trans identities because its an easy way to assume power in our society? Are you a serious person?
      - gadders 2y ago
        [flagged]
      - bobalob 2y ago
        This article is a good read, it explains why it's problematic to bestow upon men awards that were intended for women: https://www.filia.org.uk/latest-news/2018/9/21/does-the-apparel-oft-proclaim-the-man https://www.filia.org.uk/latest-news/2018/9/21/does-the-appa...

LastTrain 2y ago

And that impacts you on a daily basis exactly how? Think long and hard about why that would even begin to bother you. Not to mention is was barely a passing side issue for Harris

djohnston 2y ago
Are you implying that people should only vote on things which they encounter in their day-to-day lived experience? That's silly and not how the world works. Why are you mad about Gaza? You aren't getting JDAMs dropped on your roof, are you? How does Gaza impact you on a daily basis? Harris failed to distance herself from positions that are deeply unpopular with the majority of Americans (e.g. sex changes for illegal immigrants). That's all there is to it. If you want to step away from this particular issue, she failed to distance herself from the Biden administration's policies. There's a pretty famous clip of her failing to answer a question to that point, definitely on the youtubes.
- LastTrain 2y ago
  I tend to care about policies that don't impact me personally when they harm other people. I'm a natural born citizen, I'm not going to get deported with out process, but I still care about that. I'm not in grade school, so I'm not going to be a victim of a school shooting, but I still care about that. If it is a policy that doesn't impact me personally, but benefits someone else, yeah I tend to not give a shit. Why would I be against a position that has no impact on me whatsoever when it only meant to help someone else as in the case with civil rights?
  - djohnston 2y ago
    > If it is a policy that doesn't impact me personally, but benefits someone else, yeah I tend to not give a shit. You're excluding a key point - the policy often benefits one party at the cost of another. You mentioned immigration and that's a great example of this sort of pathological empathy that has infected the left. There's a cheap and fleeting sense of virtue attained when you champion illegal immigration and decry deportations. You post photos of mothers and their children crying at the border because the human trafficking organisations are having a hard time getting them across nowadays. But it's important to remember the negative pressure illegal immigrants place on wages and why there's a gross cabal of large corporations, lobbies, and affiliated NGOs, who virtue signal immigration as a means to lower their labor costs. It's important to remember the entire pipeline of illegal immigrants is owned and operated by extremely violent cartels - humans are now their most valuable product. Your desperate craving for that high of in-group acceptance is propping this up. It's not that you're empathetic - you just don't care about the negatively impacted party. Nothing new under the sun.