I wonder who is better at understanding the needs of trans people and finding the appropriate standards for care? Would it be the medical and educational professionals who work directly with trans people and pay attention to the research? Nope, it's definitely political pundits who were also opposed to the rights of gay people in the 90s…
I wonder who is better at understanding the needs of trans people and finding the appropriate standards for care? Would it be the medical and educational professionals who work directly with trans people and pay attention to the research? Nope, it's definitely political pundits who were also opposed to the rights of gay people in the 90s and 00s.
I have engaged in this debate on other posts, but frankly it's a little tiring debating trans people's right to exist. When one side's take is let individuals live their lives without state interference and the other side is trying to eliminate trans people from society, pretending that there is room for this debate in the public sphere is grossly negligent.
The Bulwark's takes are terrible because they are exactly the same conservative talking points we've left in the dust about gay and lesbian people. Children aren't being "transed" by activists any more than they are being "groomed" to be gay. Trans athletes are such a small percentage of the population that most of these laws might as well include a list of names of people banned from sports. The insistence that this is a fad is an irresponsible claim that lacks evidence, especially when you look at the real numbers of people receiving care.
Maybe if the Bulwark had ever invited a trans guest on their podcast to discuss these issues I wouldn't think their takes were terrible. But instead they "both sides" this issue in a way that gives cover to bigots on the right who would eliminate trans people entirely.
I wonder who is better at understanding the needs of trans people and finding the appropriate standards for care? Would it be the medical and educational professionals who work directly with trans people and pay attention to the research? Nope, it's definitely political pundits who were also opposed to the rights of gay people in the 90s and 00s.
I have engaged in this debate on other posts, but frankly it's a little tiring debating trans people's right to exist. When one side's take is let individuals live their lives without state interference and the other side is trying to eliminate trans people from society, pretending that there is room for this debate in the public sphere is grossly negligent.
The Bulwark's takes are terrible because they are exactly the same conservative talking points we've left in the dust about gay and lesbian people. Children aren't being "transed" by activists any more than they are being "groomed" to be gay. Trans athletes are such a small percentage of the population that most of these laws might as well include a list of names of people banned from sports. The insistence that this is a fad is an irresponsible claim that lacks evidence, especially when you look at the real numbers of people receiving care.
Maybe if the Bulwark had ever invited a trans guest on their podcast to discuss these issues I wouldn't think their takes were terrible. But instead they "both sides" this issue in a way that gives cover to bigots on the right who would eliminate trans people entirely.