you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]PenseePansyBio-Sex or Bust 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Salty, I agree (even as an American who voted for Biden) that there's legit cause for apprehension here; however, let's not lose sight of the fact that there's also some cause for hope.

While much of what Biden says about LGB issues (and everything he says about "trans") certainly does unnerve me, he's no frothing-at-the-mouth ultra-leftist or SJW. Quite the contrary, in fact. As far as I can tell, Biden is still what he originally was: an early-1970s-style, moderately-liberal Democrat. One who worked well with "Dixiecrats" (the pro-segregation Southern Dems who, to us, look-- and indeed, soon officially became-- Republican) and GOP senators. Which, frankly, would not be to his credit as far as I'm concerned, under ordinary circumstances... but now? Actually seems like a plus.

Further, Biden has always been much more of a practical, nuts-and-bolts-type politician than an ideologue. He's also shown some noteworthy aptitude for listening, admitting mistakes, and changing course as a result.

But why all this trans-cheerleading from Biden, then? Well, obviously I don't know for sure, but seems like it might be a combination of: 1.] not wanting to miss the boat on gay rights again (and it's now "LGBT", after all!); 2.] a transwoman TRA being his beloved late son's friend and honorary Biden (so unquestioning embrace of "her" may have felt like loyalty to Beau's memory); and 3.] not wanting to be out of touch (especially as a "mature" person; he may feel that any discomfort is just plain stodginess, and something an old fart like him should strive to overcome).

All of which presupposes right-minded people speaking out, and in a way that Biden can't help but hear. Even failing that, though, there's still this: Trump may have finally broken the spell cast by America over the rest of the world. Which previously caused us to be seen as the innovator, the leader; the one everybody looks to for direction. Well... no more. Not after our 45th president has shown how backward, incompetent, and generally clueless we can be. And forced everyone to get along without us... thereby demonstrating that they actually could. Doubt there's any putting THAT genie back in the bottle. But neither should any of us want to.

Really good post, too, BTW: made me think (as you so often do), which resulted in this blend of realism and cautious optimism. I hope that my take here can do the same for you. :)

[–]OPPRESSED_REPTILIANIntersex male | GNC | Don't call me "a gay", "twink" or "queen"[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yes, but look at the replies of this thread. Many people have expressed that Kamala Harris - who may well overtake Biden if he dies or falls ill, (some seem to think he might soon?) and, as much as I appreciate that the US has it's first female VP... it seems she is more "neo-liberal" and has expressed support for transgender prisoners, MTFs in bathrooms, and apparently child transition.

[–]PenseePansyBio-Sex or Bust 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah: Harris is of course a less old-fashioned liberal Democrat, and also the California variety (which has been even more painfully-woke than usual in recent years). So her trans-pandering comes as no surprise, sadly.

One thing which she does have in common with Biden is that I've never been a fan of HERS, either. (Didn't much care for Harris during the primaries; looked askance at Biden ever since he treated Anita Hill so shabbily back in 1991.) Another thing they have in common: reasons to think that their public support for genderism may not necessarily be the ride-or-die kind.

First, remember that Harris comes out of a political environment where appearing terminally-woke is required. So all her trans-talk might be nothing more than lip service. (If she was saying the same stuff as a senator from Mississippi or Idaho or someplace equally right-wing, I'd really be worried.)

Second, she made her name as a prosecutor. Which suggests a capacity for hard-nosed reasoning that's diametrically opposed to genderism's "feels not reals" woo-woo (as well as the T's sense of being above the law). Now admittedly, this record could also be motivating at least some of her wokery, as appeasement for liberals (given how much they dislike anyone who sends people to prison). But by the same token, if she gets the message that locking up criminals is actually cool with lefty-types, Harris might drop her whole look-how-ultra-liberal-I-am schtick altogether.

Third, from what I understand, there's one group of liberal Democrats who are absolutely NOT buying this trans-crap: black women. They know what a real civil rights movement looks like-- and that THIS sure as hell ain't it. May well have some influence on Harris, not only for the obvious reason, but also for the one that she shares with Biden: after all, who do they owe their victory to? First and foremost: black women.

So I'm thinking that Harris might be persuaded to spit out the trans Kool-Aid. Especially since she strikes me as a pretty pragmatic sort. People like us need to write letters telling her that we are LGB, liberals/progressives, women, and/or even conservatives who oppose genderism for the soundest of reasons: because it is irrational, and at war with any identity that's based on biological sex. Possibly we LGBs could find allies in black women here.

And if all else fails, well... remember, Salty, that-- thanks to Trump-- the U.S. has lost much of its status. We're no longer seen as a byword for progress, the one that everybody should emulate. So whatever we do now, including this sub's worst fears of Biden and Harris going full TRA from the White House, I doubt that the rest of the world will just blindly follow. They're at least gonna kick the tires first. Or maybe just ignore us altogether.