All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[Kirby101]

On paper?

Sure

In practice?

Who is going to get that done? All of the Republicans and Democrats who can make a career out of politics with the system working as it is?

In practice it would work fine. Will it get inacted? Probably not, but then many workable, common sense policies can't get enacted.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

And we haven't discussed this fool in a while. Here's Steve Scalise being a horrible, horrible human being.

And to think people on both sides of the political aisle were pulling for Scalise to recover after the ball field shooting incident that nearly took his life...at least until he recovered enough to bleat about the evils of even modest gun control. More proof that Republicans compete against each other to see who can be a bigger shitstain, in my opinion, Scalise is the current leader in the clubhouse with this vulgar stunt.

[Panfoot]

I pretty much took it that Rowling is a bigot against trans people until I finally got around to reading what she actually said.

So I guess your just writing off her constant defense over the years of well known TERFs who advocate for anti trans legislation? Or even her petty actions like deleting tweets from Stephen King after he tweeted support for transwomen or returning her Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award after the groups president criticized her comments? This was never one thing, and people that have been watching for years weren't surprised, though it sounds like you have made your mind up anyway.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

This will be like waving a red flag in front of a bull:

Gov. Tony Evers asks President Trump not to visit Kenosha

[Mister Mets]

Public financed election, money out of politics is the answer.

Would there be any way to differentiate between serious campaigns and non-serious campaigns.

Would a nobody running for President in 2024 (and there to be hundreds in each cycle, who rarely get any media attention) be able to claim the same level of public financing of Kamala Harris (assuming Biden doesn't run at 82)?

[SUPERECWFAN1]

One of the funniest things the last few months is FB making sure to have Fact Checks below posts when say someone posts something false. FB will fact check the statement and post a Politifact etc. The reaction from a lot of folks I have seen is priceless. Screaming how FB is censoring their beliefs to claiming its all bogus and Zuckerberg is part of the left agenda.

But yeah this thing by facebook has been fun to see.

[Jack Dracula]

Public financed election, money out of politics is the answer.

Agreed. It's the first step to establishing a truly representative democracy.

[Kirby101]

Would there be any way to differentiate between serious campaigns and non-serious campaigns.

Would a nobody running for President in 2024 (and there to be hundreds in each cycle, who rarely get any media attention) be able to claim the same level of public financing of Kamala Harris (assuming Biden doesn't run at 82)?

Yes, there would be.

[worstblogever]

And we haven't discussed this fool in a while. Here's Steve Scalise being a horrible, horrible human being.

Putting words in the mouth of someone who literally has to use the same technology to speak because he can't speak for himself...

Steve Scalise has been given the "off limits" treatment from the point he was shot by the media. He was, and remains a white nationalist who has spoken before such groups (while playing dumb when caught doing so). I would like to think taking advantage of a disabled person would make him no longer "off limits" from criticism.

Then again, the GOP rallied behind the president for mocking a disabled reporter, so maybe not.

[A Small Talent For War]

Speaking to a female friend of mine.

Me: Did you hear about the horrible sexist remark Steve Martin tweeted after Carrie Fisher died?

Her: No! What did he say?

Me: He said that, when he met her, he thought she was the most beautiful creature he ever saw. He soon discovered she was intelligent and compassionate.

Pause.

Her: So, cut to the chase. What sexist remark did he make?

Me: That was it. He was honest and admitted the first thing he noticed was her looks like he was a guy or something instead of BSing and pretending he didn't notice that first.

Her: Oh J**** C*****. I'm all for equality but we have turned into a nation of little anal crybabies desperate to be offended and have something to complain about.

Well, I looked up a history of what J.K. Rowling said and I'm thinking the same thing. Seriously? She objected to the term "people who menstruate" instead of just saying women or young women apparently because not all women menstruate meaning trans women. But that is WRONG. Trans women can menstruate.

Anyway, as a bi male who identified in his youth as gay all the way, I hate it when anyone implies that gay men are not really men. There was some guy who once posted an idea that you could have a man on Paradise Island and not have the island be destroyed by the curse because it turned out he was gay. The first response, which ruled the thread, was from a guy who said that he is 100% hetero to the best of his knowledge but even he found that disgusting because what the OP was really implying is that gay men don't 100% count as men.

But, even at that, I don't expect every conversation to say "Heterosexual and Homosexual". You can talk about "heterosexuality" as the overwhelming norm. You don't have to say "hetero" every time. With homosexuality, it's more prevalent than people think but you can say "gay" in acknowledgement that you're talking about something less common.

Likewise, in an every day conversation, I don't say "cis women". I just say "women" because "cis women" are the overwhelming majority.

It seems Rowling had a good record of defending trans people but she just got frustrated with some overly politically correct language and said one thing. Then she got attacked. Then she defended what she said including defending trans people. Then she got attacked for defending what she said instead of playing the game and begging for forgiveness for daring to offend some hyper sensitivity crowd that may or may not have even been trans people but just people who troll the waters of the Internet like sharks looking some wording that isn't in vogue and that they can take offense at, declare themselves to have the moral high ground and feel superior. Then she defended herself again and got accused of being that person who says "I have a black friend" because she defended her record.

And now, she's branded a transphobe over one factual statement even though that one fact is not the whole picture admittedly. She could have explained her view, which she did. But that being the end of it doesn't put anyone else into the "I'm in the clique and you're not. I'm now the good person and you're not and using you is a lever to push me higher in the correct side game".

I pretty much took it that Rowling is a bigot against trans people until I finally got around to reading what she actually said.

It is a difficult topic. I've read Rowling's version, and it seems genuine, though there may be some flaws in the reasoning. Nevertheless, I could not make any argument that Rowling hates trans people or opposes trans rights. I'd need more details precisely on the legislation she supports or opposes as often it may be that support for some minority rights can be construed to opposition to other minority rights. One of these situations was present in the Civil Rights movements where some activists supporting the voting rights for African American voters opposed voting rights for women. The reasoning was that there were far more white women in the country than black people, so extending suffrage to women would completely overwhelm any voting rights African Americans would gain. The assumption being that white women would simply vote the same as white men when it came to racial issues.

So, that has often been an impediment to progressive movements in that the strongest opposition the various activists face is infighting between the movements themselves rather than from conservative opposition which, in my view, is often quite unified. The so-called "cancel culture" often involves the cancellation of notable figures who, for the most part, would be natural allies of progressives. "We eat our own" is the common refrain here in that it is much easier to get attention attacking a public figure and the best targets are those most vulnerable to the attack. Attacking some conservative bigot would only raise their profile among their supporters, but attack a moderate liberal and you can really do some damage.

At the same time, the focus upon celebrity is in itself potentially harmful. Rich movie stars, popular novelists, entertainment magnates and producers do not represent any reality for the majority of people making a living in our societies or face the same sort of challenges doing that. The experience of these people does not translate to the political experience of people actually affected by economic and political policies.

However, I think the people who can bridge these gaps and accept that there will be significant differences of opinion on the specifics but great agreement on broad political aims are the people and leaders who offer the greatest hope for some accomplishment and resolution toward fairer, more accepting and open societies.

[Tendrin]

It is a difficult topic. I've read Rowling's version, and it seems genuine, though there may be some flaws in the reasoning. Nevertheless, I could not make any argument that Rowling hates trans people or opposes trans rights. I'd need more details precisely on the legislation she supports or opposes as often it may be that support for some minority rights can be construed to opposition to other minority rights. One of these situations was present in the Civil Rights movements where some activists supporting the voting rights for African American voters opposed voting rights for women. The reasoning was that there were far more white women in the country than black people, so extending suffrage to women would completely overwhelm any voting rights African Americans would gain. The assumption being that white women would simply vote the same as white men when it came to racial issues.

You should probably just listen to what trans people are saying about her remarks, to say nothing of the broader issues facing trans people in TERF lead entrenchment of transphobia in England, and the transphobic lies by Rowling as its most famous face. I mean, when evern Harry Potter fan sites are distancing themselves from the author, you've got a problem.

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/202...hobia-feminism

[InformationGeek]

This will be like waving a red flag in front of a bull:

Gov. Tony Evers asks President Trump not to visit Kenosha

OH! Speaking of Wisconsin, Ron Johnson dragged himself out of his hole to spout some BS.

In a highly contentious interview on CNN Sunday morning, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) repeatedly refused to condemn Kyle Rittenhouse, the Donald Trump fan accused of shooting and killing two Black Lives Matter protestors early this week.

Speaking with “State of the Union” host Dana Bash, Johnson repeatedly spoke over her while manically spouting out prepared comments and ignoring her questions that led the CNN host to finally cut him off.

“The 17-year-old accused of committing those two murders was a Trump supporter,” Bash began only to have Johnson interrupt with “It is a tragedy.”

“Do you condemn –” she attempted as he spoke over her again and repeated, “It is a tragedy."

“Do you condemn it?” she persisted.

“It is a tragedy, it is a tragedy,” he replied.

“It is a tragedy –but do you condemn it?” Bash pressed.

“Listen, I don’t want to see any loss of life. It is a tragedy, and the way you prevent tragedies is you support –,” he attempted before Bash cut him off again.

“A tragedy could be a car accident –,” the CNN host explained only to have Johnson interrupt once more.

“You allow for peaceful protesters, but you don’t allow — you don’t allow peaceful protests to turn into a siege,” he attempted. “Listen, I don’t want to see anybody lose their life. I don’t want to see the violence continue. I don’t want to see businesses burn down. I don’t want to see economic destruction. I condemn it all.”

And then this...

“The only Russian disinformation that I’m aware of that has been involved in our politics is, first of all in the Steele dossier and now Democrats inserting it into our records based on a false narrative that they created and leaked to the media and didn’t even tell Sen. Chuck Grassley and I about it,” he exclaimed. “The Democrats, again, they are being Putin’s puppets. Not me, not Chuck Grassley.”

And lastly...

Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin refuses to condemn Trump for urging his supporters to go to Portland and adjutant violence.

[Powerboy]

So I guess your just writing off her constant defense over the years of well known TERFs who advocate for anti trans legislation? Or even her petty actions like deleting tweets from Stephen King after he tweeted support for transwomen or returning her Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award after the groups president criticized her comments? This was never one thing, and people that have been watching for years weren't surprised, though it sounds like you have made your mind up anyway.

Now this stuff I didn't know, only her early tweets and confrontations. I apologize.

[Powerboy]

I had to look up what TERF meant. I need to do some more research then. IF she did say and do the things she's being accused of, then she still has the right but I am totally against what she is saying. I am 100% in support of Trans rights and you can't say without condemning words and actions that are against those same rights and don't have empathy or the understanding that words hurt.

I've always known a person can be against one bigotry but a total bigot against some other group.

I've spent a half hour trying to find Rowling's actual statements from various wordings on my search engine and mostly finding sites telling me what they say she said but no actual quotes. I finally found one actual quote and it definitely seems she is locked into a 100% birth sex or biological definition of gender or sex which defies science it takes an hour to find, read and realize those ideas are antiquated and factually untrue. Women who were born male but make the transition (and the other way for that matter) tend to think and feel in ways that are generally considered much more "female", never feel natural as males and feel perfectly natural as females except for the bigotry and hatred they face. Nature isn't god given and it f**ks up sometimes. But that can be corrected now.

It would seem though that she's not interested in facts or science and that is an indication of a phobia or fear. Otherwise, you'd just look at the evidence unless you don't want to expose yourself to anything that might change your mind.

[Tendrin]

I had to look up what TERF meant. I need to do some more research then. IF she did say and do the things she's being accused of, then she still has the right but I am totally against what she is saying. I am 100% in support of Trans rights and you can't say without condemning words and actions that are against those same rights and don't have empathy or the understanding that words hurt.

I've always known a person can be against one bigotry but a total bigot against some other group.

I've spent a half hour trying to find Rowling's actual statements from various wordings on my search engine and mostly finding sites telling me what they say she said but no actual quotes. I finally found one actual quote and it definitely seems she is locked into a 100% birth sex or biological definition of gender or sex which defies science it takes an hour to find, read and realize those ideas are antiquated and factually untrue. Women who were born male but make the transition (and the other way for that matter) tend to think and feel in ways that are generally considered much more "female", never feel natural as males and feel perfectly natural as females except for the bigotry and hatred they face. Nature isn't god given and it f**ks up sometimes. But that can be corrected now.

It would seem though that she's not interested in facts or science and that is an indication of a phobia or fear. Otherwise, you'd just look at the evidence unless you don't want to expose yourself to anything that might change your mind.

A lot of is hidden behind innocuous seeming language about 'sex being real'. Google her involvement in the Maya Forester case, for example, and waht the Maya Forester case is actually about,.

A lot of TERFism is just the repurposing of anti-gay rhetoeric to single out trans, since even a lot of gay folks can be bigoted against trans people, which is why Graham Linehan use a lot of 'in defense of lesbians' wedges to target trans people.