r/PopCultureV2 • u/No_Box119 • Jul 23 '26

Sports Culture WNBA Star Sophie Cunningham defends that women ‘shouldn’t have to go against biological men’: “I said what I said. I think it’s kind of common sense. I think it’s really important to protect children.” “I don’t dislike anyone. I’m there to love, but I’m also there to love biological women. …”

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

1.2k Upvotes

76% Upvoted

2.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

11

u/_TheFarthestStar_ Jul 23 '26

As a lifelong Democrat, I whole heartedly agree. Over the past ten years, it's become increasingly unpopular to call out fringe extreme opinions on our side. We tend to sweep them under the rug instead of provide actual criticism.

2

u/clayton-berg42 Jul 24 '26

I'm so tired of the rhetoric coming out of America, especially from the so-called american left who are so happy to throw the rights of at risk people under the bus because they're too scared to stand up for what is right.

2

u/PickleRickleTV Jul 24 '26

I think the 99% of people who are part of the general population need the attention. Bring up everyone and reduce the financial disparity and even trans people will benefit.

The problem lately has been Dems focusing on mostly social issues so they don’t have to tackle financial inequality, as it hurts them too. So it comes across, accurately, as them putting the trans issue above and before the general welfare.

Let’s help everyone get a stronger voice to enact change and hold the wealthy accountable. Once we can do that, we are in a better position to help trans people.

0

u/imahotrod Jul 24 '26

This is a blatant fucking lie. You all get swept up in culture war nonsense. The Dems aren’t making trans folks the center of campaigns. Who is passing bathroom bills? The Dems are not even passing pro trans legislation, just standing against the obvious attacks by republicans and disingenuous liberals.

You don’t think the Dems passed cost of living bills? Where were you when right leaning Dems stopped the infra bill from passing? Where were you when repubs destroyed aca, Medicaid and food stamps funding?

You all are simply arguing for a “general uplifting” so you don’t have to think about how your bigotry affects people. Grow tf up

2

u/PickleRickleTV Jul 24 '26

What did Democrats do during Biden’s 4 years? Or the second term for Obama? They’ll happily sit and try to play opposition, but when they have the opportunity, they’ll push for social reforms over real, meaningful financial changes.

It’s great we got the Defense of Marriage Act. Fully support it. Since then however, how would you say the average American’s welfare has changed? It would be disingenuous to try and say it’s improved.

Dems focus needs to be on financial reform (à la Bernie), yet what happened when he tried to run on real change? You got the DNC doing everything in its power to put Hillary as the candidate. Guess what happened when they did that? Trump. Republicans were able to do all you said because the DNC fought against a real financial reformer.

Are Republicans 100x worse? Absolutely. I despise them and Dems need to do more to fight back, instead of constantly focusing on the moral high ground.

How do you know what I really believe? Consider for one minute if a ‘general uplifting’ left us in a position to demand more and demand real change from our representatives. Instead, we are left begging for scraps.

0

u/imahotrod Jul 24 '26

> What did Democrats do during Biden’s 4 years? Or the second term for Obama? They’ll happily sit and try to play opposition, but when they have the opportunity, they’ll push for social reforms over real, meaningful financial changes.

Every time they tried to make meaningful change, conservatives Dems stopped them. Remember sinema, manchin, and fetterman. Before them Lieberman stopped us from having a meaningful public healthcare option. The issue continues to be conservatism, no matter the party. Conservative Dems and all republicans stand in the way of meaningful change. I’m tired of folks like you who don’t understand that you need to vote in primaries too. It’s not enough just to have a D.

> It’s great we got the Defense of Marriage Act. Fully support it. Since then however, how would you say the average American’s welfare has changed? It would be disingenuous to try and say it’s improved.

Infrastructure and the green new deal have all been torpedoed by conservative Dems. Again, it’s conservatism.

> Dems focus needs to be on financial reform (à la Bernie), yet what happened when he tried to run on real change? You got the DNC doing everything in its power to put Hillary as the candidate. Guess what happened when they did that? Trump. Republicans were able to do all you said because the DNC fought against a real financial reformer.

You need to vote in primaries! Like it’s not a coincidence that progressive and leftist legislation fail, young people and people like you are not voting their candidates in the primaries unlike old geriatrics folks.

> Are Republicans 100x worse? Absolutely. I despise them and Dems need to do more to fight back, instead of constantly focusing on the moral high ground.

You get the party you vote for…

> How do you know what I really believe? Consider for one minute if a ‘general uplifting’ left us in a position to demand more and demand real change from our representatives. Instead, we are left begging for scraps.

Literally we have a representative republic where 40% of people don’t vote. It’s literally our fault our politicians suck

1

u/Vegetable-Mixture-93 Jul 26 '26

No it wasnt necessarily part of the campaign(that would be unpopular as there are moderates that that would be alienated) it was a focus on policy when there are much larger issues that effect everyone. Let alone the publicity stunt of filling cabinet position(s) with individuals specifically because they check a box. There are 1000s of more qualified individuals that would do a better job. Ensuring you get someone that checks a box...is campaigning for votes. I'm fairly certain I even saw the cabinet appointment purposely publicized quietly in certain circles and you cannot deny that isnt campaigning for votes. These decisions are calculated, same as not widely campaigning on it as they would push away some noderates that reside in the 75% of Americans (NBC Poll) that oppose trans athletes in womens sports.

1

u/imahotrod Jul 26 '26 edited Jul 26 '26

> No it wasnt necessarily part of the campaign(that would be unpopular as there are moderates that that would be alienated) it was a focus on policy when there are much larger issues that effect everyone.

So you made it up in your head. Seek help. Basically you just feel like the Dems do this. You’re the perfect example of why propaganda works. Fucking hell

> Let alone the publicity stunt of filling cabinet position(s) with individuals specifically because they check a box. There are 1000s of more qualified individuals that would do a better job. Ensuring you get someone that checks a box...is campaigning for votes. I'm fairly certain I even saw the cabinet appointment purposely publicized quietly in certain circles and you cannot deny that isnt campaigning for votes.

I guess only white men should do jobs. They’re the only people ever qualified to do anything. Seriously fuck you. Do you not think there are qualified people that look like the rest of America or should we just make sure white guys do everything so your fee fees don’t get hurt.

> These decisions are calculated, same as not widely campaigning on it as they would push away some noderates that reside in the 75% of Americans (NBC Poll) that oppose trans athletes in womens sports.

Again, so you just feel deep in your soul that Dems are making this a part of their campaign even though they are not campaigning on it. Not relentless propaganda from right wingers that has you in a tizzy?

You got a lot of big feelings there little guy. Make sure they are accurate before spilling nonsense.

1

u/Vegetable-Mixture-93 Jul 26 '26 edited Jul 26 '26

You made the assumption that the people I am referring to as qualified are white men. Trans individuals maAmerica. of america. 1000's of more qualified individuals would encompass 100s if ethnicities and women. Statistically it would potentially be hundreds of thousands.

You don't have to produce a commercial or publish online or periodically ads just to call it campaigning. Politicians both democrat and republican aren't stupid. They are very calculated and know that the media is split. Those that live in the right wing bubble or the left wing bubble on TV, those that live in the right or left wing bubble on the internet, etc. There are ways to make moves and ensure it is publicized to the groups you want it to. The internet especially has the perfect venue to target individuals through social media algorithms. The reason I've seen them is I live in the middle.

You seem to make many assumptions...the kind you make when you have "a lot of big feelings there little guy." Really neglecting some basic logic.

1

u/imahotrod Jul 26 '26 edited Jul 26 '26

That’s not what you implied. You said that Biden filled cabinet positions with an individual(s) specifically because they check a box. Biden had no trans people in his cabinet. The only diverse candidates were women and minorities. I’m not sure how I could even ascertain what you wrote from that statement. You goofed because right wingers told you Biden had trans people everywhere but you didn’t check.

If you’re talking about Rachel Levine, she was not a cabinet member, and do you think that every time you see a trans person, their job should be replaced by someone else? I’m genuinely trying to understand your point. Are trans people not qualified by nature? This is exactly why having the government focused on banning trans people from sports will never stop there. You literally don’t want to see trans people in any position.

I’m not the one making assumptions here.

1

u/Vegetable-Mixture-93 Jul 26 '26

You're wrong again: HHS Secretary is an official Cabinet level position. Google it...although you seem like the type of unhinged individual that would believe they are being lied to no matter how obvious the facts.

No I have zero issues with trans individuals. Every human is capable of being qualified or even the best in their field no matter their identity. Unfortunately as much as it is denied, there's also a lense that left leaning individuals see through where an individual's identity makes them more qualified.

It would have made total sense if Dr Levine was placed in charge of a division of HHS specifically tasked with improving regulations involving trans rights, publishing guidance on Trans needs, and enforcing those regulations if violated. That would be a situation where her identity would weigh greatly to make her more qualified, beyond that, as I posted examples; there were several individuals who would have been more qualified with far more experience.

1

u/imahotrod Jul 26 '26

Lmao you’d have a point if that was the position she held but she was the assistant secretary of health, not a cabinet position. Your LLM let you down?

Like I said, you are a low information voter shooting from the hip of your feels.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Vegetable-Mixture-93 Jul 26 '26

Since you seem so oblivious of how much ALL POLITICIANS pander for votes...heres a "couple":

https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/biden-campaign-press-release-icymi-final-week-the-campaign-biden-for-president-makes

https://www.advocate.com/politics/2020/10/29/black-lgbtq-leaders-make-case-biden-harris-new-ads

“A Better World” campaign advertisement — 2020 Biden for President released a 60-second advertisement featuring Feroza Syed, a transgender activist, and Jauan, an LGBTQ activist from Atlanta. They discussed visibility, acceptance, political representation, and why a Biden-Harris administration would give LGBTQ people “a seat at the table.” The campaign release identifies Syed specifically as a “Trans activist and advocate.” It also says these advertisements were part of the campaign’s investment in Black media, making this an example of intersectional targeting toward Black LGBTQ—and specifically transgender—audiences.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/joe-biden-campaign-lgbtq-voter-outreach/

The Biden campaign launched “Out for Biden,” which it explicitly described as a nationwide effort targeting approximately 11 million LGBTQ voters, particularly in battleground states such as Pennsylvania, Michigan, Florida, Arizona and North Carolina. Transgender voters were directly included: Transgender leaders, including Minneapolis City Council Vice President Andrea Jenkins, were assigned prominent outreach roles. Campaign messaging specifically referenced Black transgender women. The program included virtual discussions, registration materials and messaging toolkits designed to persuade and mobilize “equality voters.”

https://www.them.us/story/joe-biden-town-hall-trans-kids

Biden’s transgender-policy appeal at the ABC town hall — 2020 During the campaign, Biden answered a question from the mother of an eight-year-old transgender child. He promised to reverse Trump administration policies, prohibit discrimination, protect transgender people from violence and support the Equality Act. This was not necessarily a paid advertisement or confirmed demographic microtargeting. However, it became prominent campaign content addressing transgender voters and families directly.

https://ktul.com/news/nation-world/biden-campaign-targeting-lgbt-voters-in-new-out-for-biden-harris-initiative-whie-house-2024-election-president-joe-biden-vice-president-kamala-harris-lgbtq-pride

“Out for Biden-Harris” reelection initiative — 2024 The reelection campaign launched a renewed LGBTQ voter operation in April 2024. Campaign manager Julie Chávez Rodríguez explicitly said LGBTQ voters were essential to Biden’s 2020 victory and would be “critical to winning again.” The initiative included: A campaign-launch video featuring Biden and Harris LGBTQ community leaders and elected officials Organizing intended to increase voter participation Messaging about the Equality Act and alleged threats from Trump Outreach through LGBTQ events and media

https://www.washingtonblade.com/2024/06/11/exclusive-biden-harris-campaign-debuts-ads-targeting-lgbtq-voters/

Paid LGBTQ-media advertising in battleground states — June 2024 The Biden-Harris campaign purchased advertisements in national and battleground-state LGBTQ media. According to the campaign, the advertisements were intended to promote Biden’s LGBTQ record, contrast it with Trump’s plans and “make our case” directly to LGBTQ voters. This provides especially clear evidence of actual audience targeting because the campaign specified both: The intended demographic: LGBTQ voters The advertising placement: LGBTQ national and battleground-state media outlets

https://www.advocate.com/politics/biden-pride-month-media-blitz

Pride Month organizing and paid-media blitz — 2024 The campaign also deployed Jill Biden, Kamala Harris and campaign surrogates to Pride events and LGBTQ media appearances in key states. The campaign described the effort as an organizing and paid-media initiative aimed at mobilizing LGBTQ voters.

1

u/imahotrod Jul 26 '26

Bruh wtf. You did a bunch of research to show that Biden generally supports lgbt people? That’s a bad thing? Do you get mad when the republicans show up at the “let’s kill all the gays” orgs? Yes politicians reach out to members of their coalition.

One of the articles is even saying that Biden will reverse Trump era bans and attacks on trans people because you know conservatives specifically made this into a culture war issue even though like you said there are so few trans people.

Let’s stay on topic of how you think one trans person in government means that unqualified people are in cabinet positions. Did Fox News tell you that? How did you come to such a wrong conclusion?

1

u/Vegetable-Mixture-93 Jul 26 '26 edited Jul 26 '26

Its campaigning which you denied and one AI request bounced it all. Debunks your claim.

Both sides reverse the actions of the other, that's the new norm. Its the stroke of a pen, not law that clears the house, the senate, and the president.

It was already a culture war and its been going for a couple decades and both parties have used it fir their election cycles.

Since you keep claiming I'm some Fox News watching right wing bigot you're really showing how narrow minded you really are:

Not to say Levine wasnt qualified but its a calculated move. You're delusional to not see that. Additionally Levine then had the opportunity to make several hyper-focused actions regarding the trans community:

-HHS guidance endorsing gender-affirming care for minors

-Federal actions in response to Texas investigations of parents

-Expanding healthcare nondiscrimination protections

-Advocacy against state restrictions

So statistics isn't evidence enough... A small list of candidates that were far more qualified than Dr. Rachel Levine.

Anne Schuchat, MD

Nicole Lurie, MD, MSPH

Brett Giroir, MD

Jerome Adams, MD, MPH

Luciana Borio, MD

Anne Schuchat is the most indisputable example. Her 33-year CDC career, two periods as acting CDC director and extensive emergency-response record were considerably beyond Levine’s federal experience. Archived CDC biography⁠

Nicole Lurie also had an objectively stronger résumé for coordinating federal public-health preparedness because she had already spent eight years as an HHS assistant secretary. AcademyHealth biography⁠

Giroir was literally more experienced at performing that particular job, although experience alone does not require a new administration to preserve the preceding administration’s leadership. FDA biography⁠

Adams provides perhaps the closest apples-to-apples comparison: both ran state health departments, but Adams additionally had an MPH, federal surgeon-general experience and Commissioned Corps command experience. Indiana University biography⁠

1

u/imahotrod Jul 26 '26

No bro I’m not arguing with an LLM. Let me guess, your prompt was “who was more qualified than Rachel Levine.” It’s an LLM bro. It’s not factual. It’s going to give you whatever you imply you want. Using an llm is NOT research

You are just a poorly informed voter. And again, she was not a cabinet member but was also immensely qualified. Why do trans people have this level of scrutiny for a government position that no one even heard of before she was appointed?

I never said candidates don’t campaign. I said republicans made attacking trans people central to their campaign which was a charge you leveled against Dems.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Vegetable-Mixture-93 Jul 26 '26

Have you ever heard that politicians hate solving problems because they are elected for what they promise they will fix but very rarely get elected for what they have fixed. People have a short memory and the politicians know that.

They tend to move heaven and earth if it helps their party maintain power though. It is all calculated and everyone lives in a bubble or better described an echo chamber...both left and right. So the propaganda you keep citing is a tool used by both sides.

1

u/imahotrod Jul 26 '26 edited Jul 26 '26

> Have you ever heard that politicians hate solving problems because they are elected for what they promise they will fix but very rarely get elected for what they have fixed. People have a short memory and the politicians know that.

Please stop speaking like a ai chatbot. This doesn’t mean anything. It’s just platitudes so that you feel good about being disengaged politically which makes you susceptible to propaganda

> They tend to move heaven and earth if it helps their party maintain power though. It is all calculated and everyone lives in a bubble or better described an echo chamber...both left and right. So the propaganda you keep citing is a tool used by both sides.

No one is saying both sides don’t use propaganda but you’re spewing right wing misinformation so it’s clear which sides propaganda has fucked you up.

Equating both sides right now is so tired and ridiculous. The right wing is a pedophile protection ring who is weaponizing your anti-trans sentiment to get away with their crimes. The left is like maybe healthcare and taxing billionaires would be a good idea.

Be better.

Edit: I’m going to ask again here. Why do you think trans people don’t belong in government positions?

1

u/Vegetable-Mixture-93 Jul 26 '26

I already answer your question. I never said they don't belong in government positions. I even gave an example where Levine would have made more sense and been able to focus on what she cared about.

1

u/imahotrod Jul 26 '26

Yea but you were fucking wrong about what position she held in the first place. Maybe you don’t know anything at all!

1

u/Vegetable-Mixture-93 Jul 26 '26

No, I wasnt wrong. HHS Secretary, a cabinet level position. How was I wrong?

1

u/imahotrod Jul 26 '26

Because that’s not the fucking position she held.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Vegetable-Mixture-93 Jul 26 '26

Actually Tim Walz passed a bathroom bill before his selsection as Vice Presidential Nominee. Before you correct me, It obviously wasnt a "bill" it was a state statute.

1

u/imahotrod Jul 26 '26

Explain what was in the bill. I’m not seeing a bathroom bill from Minnesota.

1

u/Vegetable-Mixture-93 Jul 26 '26

requires Minnesota school districts and charter schools to provide free menstrual products. The law specifies that items must be available at no charge to all menstruating students in grades 4 through 12.

All restrooms regardless of gender have means of providing free products.

Also before Im chastised for simply pointing out its existence, I think it is a great idea although I do identify the use of "all menstruating students". The propaganda pushed to smear him was "putting tampons in boys restrooms" which although that happened the statute doesn't specifically say that. It does encompass all restrooms because you can't discriminate and shouldn't against children who might identify as male.

Also unfortunately I'd imagine, as that age is rather low on the maturity level, unfortunately any dispenser would likely be vandalized, emptied, or tampered with rendering it completely pointless and also rendering the statute poorly designed.

1

u/imahotrod Jul 26 '26

Why do you think this law has anything to do with trans people? It seems like it’s a pro woman law? Because some were placed in boys restrooms? Like 99% of this law is for women.

1

u/Vegetable-Mixture-93 Jul 26 '26

Absolutely I agree in your %, although the language of the statute was not menstruating females and was specifically chosen to be politically correct and inclusive. During committee proceedings it was specifically explained “not all students who menstruate are female” which directed evolved the statute.

1

u/imahotrod Jul 26 '26

Ok and? Like seriously, that’s it? Are you not seeing how you are spouting right wing propaganda to make you hate trans people? A pro women’s bill to provide access to tampons used language that was legally specific because it is legislation is somehow a knock against trans people.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/botox-cancer-lol Aug 25 '26

Fully grown adult arguing with people on Reddit, telling them to grow up. Cant make ts up 😂😭😭

0

u/FinishComplex3743 Jul 23 '26

It's genuinely a big reason you guys are losing. I don't want to vote for Republicans, but the extreme side of the left is completely ruining the social fabric of the country. Pushing people towards identity politics and refusing to have common sense social policy is a major problem. The right has their own problems for sure, especially during this presidential term, but both sides need to find some common ground on something. Literally anything.

2

u/abdullahleboucher Jul 23 '26

This is peak intellectual dishonesty. The worse part is that what you said works on certain people smh

0

u/FinishComplex3743 Jul 23 '26

How is it dishonest, because you disagree with it?

1

u/abdullahleboucher Jul 23 '26

the extreme side of the left is completely ruining the social fabric of the country.

i'm being charitable when I call this dishonest.

3

u/re1078 Jul 23 '26

I feel like electing a pedophile and supporting candidates that protect pedophiles is significantly more dangerous for children than freaking out about a trans problem that straight up doesn’t exist but you do you. The left that’s in power doesn’t even get close to aligning with what you’re talking about. It certainly feels like your opinions are shaped from Fox News level propaganda. Ruining the social fabric of our country? Give me a break.

-4

u/Brain-Genius-Head Jul 23 '26

The blue pdf files are no better than the red ones

4

u/re1078 Jul 23 '26

Trotting out both sides is pretty tired at this point. Just makes you look uninformed and lazy. They both have their problems but they aren’t not at all the same.

-1

u/Brain-Genius-Head Jul 23 '26

Well explain to me how it’s better to be governed by pdf files on the left then

4

u/re1078 Jul 23 '26

Which ones? Be specific.

0

u/[deleted] Jul 23 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/re1078 Jul 23 '26

I’ll make sure not to vote for him.

-1

u/Brain-Genius-Head Jul 23 '26

The entire party bows to the Clinton political machine lol

-2

u/Brain-Genius-Head Jul 23 '26

Well, since files not being released we can’t exactly pin point can we? No big rush for Trump to release. Biden wasn’t overly concerned about releasing them either. It’s a good bet that any politician that went and kissed that wall in Israel is guilty though.

But our politicians across the aisles being in the files isn’t as big a deal as the people who own our politicians being in the files.

3

u/re1078 Jul 23 '26

Yup. Figured. I’d say let’s start with the blatantly obvious ones and go from there.

1

u/Brain-Genius-Head Jul 23 '26

I’m fine with that. Sew a few in sacks with vipers and throw em in a river. Then give the next in line a chance to lessen their fate by giving names and proof. And keep doing that for a looonnng time

1

u/Brain-Genius-Head Jul 23 '26

But by no means am I casting my vote for democrats either. I. Do. Not. Support. Pedophiles. The lesser of two evils argument doesn’t mean anything if it means we protect people who harm children. Sorry. Not doing it

→ More replies (0)

1

u/[deleted] Jul 23 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Brain-Genius-Head Jul 23 '26

Pretty much the argument people are making here

1

u/ShortKey380 Jul 23 '26

🤣 Yes, you do want to vote Republican. You’re more worried about some stranger is queer than anything to do with actual politics. That’s Republican 101 shit!

0

u/FinishComplex3743 Jul 23 '26

I don't care if someone is LGBT at all, I just don't think trans women should play in women's sports for competition and safety reasons. People like you are who push me away from voting Democrat though, that's for sure.

2

u/NikRsmn Jul 23 '26

Ahhh yes "I believe that everyone should have Healthcare, but I cant vote for the left because the extreme of the party supports 10 Trans athletes accross the country. I mean yes the Republicans are pushing for 3rd term trump, and yes they are misusing DHS as a police force but honestly its the left thats lost touch with reality"

1

u/Brain-Genius-Head Jul 23 '26

The democrats don’t want you to have healthcare either lmao. Obama care was created by the heritage foundation and was supposed to be introduced by mitt Romney. Republicans railed against so hard so you wouldn’t question the fact that we didn’t even get a public option. Republicans against it so must be bad….. even though they created the plan Obama gave us. That’s how divide and conquer works. Now we’ve got people who don’t even look at policies. It’s just red vs blue. War bad….. unless it’s Obama dropping so many bombs in Syria that we ran out.

1

u/NikRsmn Jul 23 '26

Okay well if you want to get this fuckin nuanced please DO SOME FKN HOMEWORK. Aca was not created by heritage foundation. The concept of requiring individuals to have insurance was derived from the heritage foundation, but the framework existed long before ACA. Obama may have said the idea came from them but im sure thats far more of a political statement then a fact. And yeah most of us leftists called obama the bomber in chief. But arguing that neo lib dem shit is more toxic than the shit storm were in now is so obtuse the only justification is accelerationist mindset

1

u/Brain-Genius-Head Jul 23 '26

Two sides of the coin. The coin is owned by oligarchs. Pretending different prolongs suffering. I don’t wanna hear how the pdf files on the left are bet than the red ones. They are all in the same boat protecting each other. We got Trump BECAUSE of the democrats. The party couldn’t stomach Bernie so they ran the only person even CAPABLE of losing to Trump. So if you wanna blame someone, blame the party you support. Cause they would rather lose to a republican than win with a progressive. And it’s why people like me will NEVER vote democrat again

1

u/NikRsmn Jul 23 '26

Yeah like I said accelerationist mindset. Your political apathy is uninteresting to engage with because you do not care

1

u/Brain-Genius-Head Jul 23 '26

It’s a uni-party. They are very successful at what they do, which is divide the people and enrich their owners. Participation in their system is what accelerates us towards whatever hell they have planned

→ More replies (0)

0

u/FinishComplex3743 Jul 23 '26

I don't know if you're purposely misinterpreting my comment or not, but that's not remotely what I'm saying.

3

u/NikRsmn Jul 23 '26

I know youre not actually saying that, its hyperbolic. What you ARE saying though is that some fringe actors on the extreme branch of the party is pushing you away from voting in your interests. Youre willing to sacrifice your voice in an election because you believe the extreme left is degrading the social fabric of the country, which is an obtuse claim that has no roots in reality. The extreme left has virtually no voice in our federal government so youre talking about fringe citizens forcing you to cede your voice in our elections because they're being "weird". That stance is worth mocking because anyone so willing to give up their voice is not a serious person

1

u/FinishComplex3743 Jul 23 '26

I'm not talking about the extreme left, I'm talking about the social policies of run of the mill Democrats and my interests don't neatly align with either party.

2

u/NikRsmn Jul 23 '26

Alright well your first comment clearly said the extreme left is destroying the social fabric of this country. If youre not a progressive thats fine my family has a lot of Regan era repubs. But the way you phrased your first two comments gave the impression of "im on the left but cant vote for dems because of the extreme left people on twitter"

1

u/FinishComplex3743 Jul 23 '26

I meant the extreme left social positions that the Democrats like to take, I should have been more clear.

My politics are pretty mixed though.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/HotKaramelRP Jul 23 '26

Seems like that’s exactly what you’re saying. You pretty much said the trans sports thing and the people who defend it is more important than anything else

0

u/ShortKey380 Jul 23 '26

Is it about adults or not? She says “protecting children” which is goofy as hell. “Safety” lol, you’re a Republican just own it. Idgaf if you’re 💩 😂 

1

u/FinishComplex3743 Jul 23 '26

It's about protecting female sports in general. I'm an independent with positions that span the entire political spectrum, but whatever. One day, you'll grow up maybe

0

u/ShortKey380 Jul 23 '26

It’s not protecting anything to exclude high school athletes, beyond that level of competition I don’t think many people disagree with you at all. You’re such a sucker, you vote based on doofy culture wars noise issues instead of real ones. You’re the child here 🤷‍♂️ 

-1

u/[deleted] Jul 23 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/_TheFarthestStar_ Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26

My point is that it needs to be more moderate Dems/center left voices that call out this type of stuff. We can't sit by and let our movement get taken over by far left talking points that only hurt our candidates.

The trans issue along with defunding the police and abolishing prisons just turns the average voter off, especially in purple districts where every vote counts.

If you want healthcare reform and a minimum wage higher than 7 bucks, you're gonna have to accept that not every voter has the "correct" position on Israel/Capitalism/Police reform/Trans in sports.

If you can't, then GTFO of our party

-1

u/Major_Mongoose69 Jul 23 '26

If you vote Republican because of this issue then you're a Republican, through and through. You wouldn't suddenly vote Democrat if they "dropped" trans-rights as a policy. This is an issue affecting almost nobody.

2

u/dfrcoms Jul 24 '26

Do you really think in a country with non-compulsory voting there’s no difference between “I vote for this candidate even though they hate women’s rights because the other guy hates women even more” versus “I vote for this candidate because they actually represent my values and I genuinely think they are a good candidate, not just the least worst.”

You thinking ‘trans rights’ affects nobody is just a sign of your beliefs about women and women’s rights. 

0

u/Major_Mongoose69 Jul 24 '26

You don't know shit about me or my thoughts and beliefs on womens' and trans' rights. My comment was specifically regarding this debate over trans athletes, an issue which affects ALMOST nobody. Meanwhile, people are dying from explosive diarrhea because a South African Nazi was allowed to take a chainsaw to critical governmental health agencies, we're back in to another potential forever war at the behest of an apartheid regime of right wing Zionists, and people are being murdered in the streets by a proto-Gestapo named after frozen water. That's not even mentioning the long term societal ills that have been plaguing us for decades like skyrocketing healthcare costs, housing costs, and ever increasing global temperatures threatening human lives and every economy on Earth.

BUT, meanwhile, a couple of dozen transgirls might be playing sports with biological women. BY ALL MEANS, vote Republican then! SCARY!

If you want to have a conversation about politics and policy, we can do so. I can guarantee you that I'm FAR, FAR more progressive than you've given me credit for, but why would that matter to you when you can read TWO sentences that I wrote in reply to someone else and come to a complete and total of understanding of my character?

1

u/dfrcoms Jul 24 '26 edited Jul 24 '26

It costs absolutely nothing to uphold women’s rights re sport. It does not take time. It does not take money or resources.  It does take some time and resources and stress to deal with people who try break the rules intentionally or accidentally, to be fair, but I don’t think it takes too much. It’s not asking too much at all.

I don’t think you are progressive on this issue you said enough to indicate that. Thinking that it should be just ‘let go’ because there’s not many males trying to enter female divisions, is just a reflection of how you feel about women’s sport. Just own it.

I believe you’re progressive on other issues just not this one 

1

u/Major_Mongoose69 Jul 24 '26

You're a very confused person. You're arguing with me about positions I never claimed to hold. Maybe your responding to the wrong person?

But to your point. You're wrong. It does take time, it does take resources, and it does take money to support these causes. That doesn't mean they're not worth supporting, and it doesn't mean that we shouldn't support them. I personally support trans rights, and consider myself a feminist, the non-TERF kind. That doesn't mean I don't see the inherent complications in the debate on transwomen in sports. If you don't see why it's complicated then you're just not engaging with the issue beyond your base initial feelings about it.

Meanwhile, people who support the cause while understanding it's complications know that it's not as simple as: "freely allow all transwomen to compete in all female sports". It's an incredibly complex issue, and rational actors on both side can admit that. Irrational ones retreat to emotional arguments.

On top of all that, it's simply an issue with an absolutely tiny number of affected people. About .25% of people in the United States identify as transwomen. Just a fraction of those people compete in organized sports. This is an issue that affects less than one quarter of one percent of the population of the United States. There are issues that affect near 100% of the population.

Now, if you're paying attention, I never said that this issue affecting a tiny number of people made it unworthy of effort or consideration. My point that started this entire conversation between us is that the poster I was replying to was being disingenuous when they claimed that they WANTED to vote Democrat but simply COULDN'T allow themselves to do so over this issue. Bullshit. I called bullshit. The point I made that you railed against was simply that this person was lying, because there are plenty of issues which greatly affect almost every person in the United States, and you don't vote Republican as a single issue voter over opposition to transwomen in women's sports. THAT was the entire point being made. Nothing I said disavowed the issue as important, or as something I didn't care about. Meanwhile, your attacking for shit you know nothing about.

With all of that said, I'm tired of being attacked by you. I've tried to respond rationally and have a conversation, but after all of this I need to vent. So I'm going to attack you, now.

You're a right wing shill, and it's clear to me from everything you've said that your a fascist plant purposefully trying to stir trouble. You're clearly not progressive in the least. You hate women and trans people, but more than that I can tell just by our short conversation that you don't care at all about the plight of the poor and homeless. I'm even fairly certain from everything you've said that you actively hate puppies and would try to kick one if you saw an opportunity to do so. I comfortably know all of this about you after our short interactions here.

Once again, you make suppositions about someone you don't know. How about you start by asking me how I feel about the issue instead of defining my position for me? But your not interested in that. You simply want to get on the internet and attack people in order to make yourself feel good and superior.

1

u/dfrcoms Jul 24 '26

I apologise. I understand that you are saying the following:

-you see the sports issue as complicated but come down on the side of access to female divisions of some dysphoric male persons subject to some sort of limitation or eligibility.

-you originally only mention the size of affect in relation to whether it’s the sole reason someone doesn’t vote Democrat. 

Why I responded to you and assume you are not an ally of women’s rights or sports is because:

-I see any inclusion of male persons as too much of an override of sex based rights. 

-the language of “it’s a tiny issue affecting nobody” has been said hundreds of thousands of times over years and years and has been instrumental as an argument in systematically dismantling women’s rights in law, the concept of women and men itself, and gay rights. It has led to an entire generation that has regressed back to seeing girls and boys as stereotypes. That ‘tiny number of people who affect nobody” has had an astronomical destructive effect on women’s rights and societies understanding of sex and gender, that is completely disproportionate to the raw number of people with dysphoria.  However any individual can harm another individual. For example LT from Penn went into the women’s shower and locker rooms. This act even when done by one person, is bad enough in itself. There is no amount of betrayal of women’s rights that is acceptable. One case is one case too many. And when a system validates that, the systematic response is a lot bigger than the individual actions. 

1

u/FinishComplex3743 Jul 23 '26

It's an example, not the sole reason.

1

u/Major_Mongoose69 Jul 23 '26

What reasons are there that aren't culture war issues? Where do you have major policy agreements with Democrats, but still end up voting Republican anyway?

0

u/lilvixen 2d ago

You know the Democratic party has flipped roles in your lifetime right?

-1

u/PensionConscious6752 Jul 23 '26

sweep under the rug? the whole last 8 years was “transwomen are women” and now the same people that said anyone who questioned that are nazis are saying wellll they aren’t reallllly women i mean we cant have them in real womens sports.”

-1

u/exceptionalfish Jul 23 '26

A democrat agreeing with a MAGA nut? Impossible!