I truly want politicians to start saying this very clear statement: "Anybody who spends any time thinking about the genitals of a child needs to get help and to stop, immediately. It is not normal, okay or healthy for adults to obsess about what children look like underneath their clothes. No child is safe growing up with this disgusting cultural fixation about their naked bodies. It's time to move on from this, for the sake of our children."
I grew up in Texas and have (to the heartbreak of my mom) not felt safe there the last few years. I was beginning to hope between him and Hinojosa...but the just craven nonsense that doesn't even get him "untagged" from trans people...
Mainstream democrats are completely lost without a map. They're going in circles trying to thread a needle just right so that trans people and transphobes both vote for them.
They all lack the principles and competency of Abdul.
Talarico had a chance to go full transphobe, like Seth Moulton or Marcy Kaptur or Amy Acton. He didn't. He stood up for trans kids, even if imperfectly. And he's running against Ken Paxton, who might just be the second most corrupt politician in this country and is certainly one of the most dangerous to trans kids.
If I lived in Texas (heaven forfend), he'd have my vote. No question. We'll see how he does if he gets to the Senate, which seems likely based on recent polling.
I agree. I don't think he's against us. I think he's playing word games. And actually, I wish the truly dangerous Dems using "men in women's sports" language would learn something from his approach, like Sand and Turek in Iowa, and Amy Achtung in Ohio.
I think you're right about the word games, and his history does suggest he supports us. That said, when politicians play word games, they can pin themselves down to certain positions. When he said he would support a national ban on surgery for minors, that committed him to voting "yes" for such a ban or doing a "flip-flop." I SUSPECT what he was thinking when he made that policy announcement was that he would oppose sexual reassignment surgery on minors, which is not a horrible position. But I don't think he was thinking about top surgery for trans boys.
We can hope he "flip-flops" on that position, citing that he meant reassignment surgery, not top surgery - something that even cis girls sometimes get (i.e. breast reduction surgery). Maybe he has a flip-flop path already mapped out, or maybe he just carelessly drove his bus into a giant pothole. We won't know until he actually casts a vote on this issue.
To your point in another comment about Talrico being on a "short leash" with you -
Very similarly, I've been thinking of Talrico as being on a "watchlist". I think he has good intentions, so I'm largely giving him the benefit of the doubt, but's positioned himself right at the edge of the anti-trans line IMO. If he moves another inch, I think he'll have crossed it.
If I were in Texas I would not be voting for him based on his comments about trying to get the government involved in taking away Healthcare from trans kids in order to placate and side with a faction of hateful transphobes. Period. I'm not voting for a Democrat majority. I'm voting for freedom for trans people. Democrats can choose positions that make me vote for them or not. Its up to them.
I totally get your position, and I don't disagree with it. We have only bad choices and worse choices. I would argue, though, that we've already lost this election with regard to trans issues. Even if Dems take back control, there won't be a majority in Congress that supports us - no matter how we vote.
I would argue that we should regroup and rethink our path forward. We tend to think in terms of elections - choosing between the candidates offered to us. This is not a good approach, when those choices only end up as bad ones.
What we need to do instead is to fight our battles hard in the PRIMARIES. We need to find candidates who are friendly on our issues, or even better, we need to run candidates from our own community. And then we need to GET OUT THE VOTE like our lives depend on it. That's how we put a good candidate on the ballot in the general elections.
This is an especially effective strategy in "safe" Democratic districts where we've STILL been thrown under the bus (for no good reason). Essentially, whoever wins the Democratic primary wins the election. If we're not taking our fight to the primary, then we're just going to be late showing up to a battle that has already been won or lost.
Personally, I'm voting for the Democrats this election (and not saying you're doing the wrong thing by voting against them). There are other issues that deeply affect my children and grandchildren, and this election I'm voting for their interests. But in subsequent elections, I'm throwing my efforts into the primaries. THAT is where we have to win.
I've seen pictures of young girls who are trans and thought, she looks just like every other young girl who just wants to play sports with their friends. I think other people think that every young girls who are trans must be twice as tall and weigh twice as much as their friends. That is no how biology works. Often the girls sprout up taller than the boys who have a later growth spurt.
I also realize that some cis girls with larger body types might just fit that feared size differential. With Talarico's case-by-case-if-it-may -cause-injury-to-others, will we have to tell the cis girl with the large body type she can't play? Or how about the young cis boy with a small body type, that he's too small for football? He's still discriminating unless those cis kids can be banned too. Anyway, he's a politition and they need to be able to weasel if they want to be elected. (my apologies to weasels everywhere for that analogy).
Any bill will not target cis kids what do e er. It will only be targeted to tran kids and more specifically only trans feminine kids
Will trans masculine kids get caught up? Possibly but they will not be the target for any sports bans.
It's just like any discussion around puberty blockers or any type of top surgeries (including gynocomastia). It is only talked about being banded for trans kids.
"Talarico still pledges to support a national ban on surgical interventions that help transgender youth, which may include top surgery or hormone implants." <-- An evil stance I hope he has a "change of heart" about as soon as he is elected.
" Talarico has said he opposes “trans athletes playing in girls’ sports if it endangers safety or fairness”" <-- And why won't specify? I realize that means he is pinned down, but voters aren't impressed with obfuscation.
I would not have supported them in the primary against Crockett had I known their views. This irritates me to no end. My only hope is he doesn't back that religious bus up and finish us. In other news Hinojosa seems to have a chance against abbot.
I’m not in Texas, but if I had been Jasmine Crockett would have been my first choice. She is brilliant and courageous. She isn’t afraid to speak truth to power. Hers is the energy we need more of. IMHO
I worry deeply about Democrats running for office in the midterms who have made statements concerning transgender youth and access to gender-affirming care. The question is not simply whether Democrats regain control of Congress—it is what kind of legislation will they support once they get there?
Take Henry Cuellar or James Talarico as examples: How would they vote on legislation protecting transgender youth? Would they support access to medically appropriate hormone therapy? Would they support protections for families, doctors, and young people seeking care? These are not abstract questions. The answers could directly affect the lives and futures of transgender youth.
We already know where many Republican lawmakers stand on these issues. That makes it even more important to know where every candidate—Democrat or Republican—stands before we give them our support.
If Democrats regain control but some of their own members oppose meaningful protections for transgender youth, then what exactly have we accomplished? A change in party control means little if transgender youth are still left without the protections and medically appropriate care they need.
Transgender youth deserve more than promises. They deserve lawmakers willing to protect their dignity, privacy, safety, and access to appropriate medical care.
Before November, candidates need to answer clearly: Where do you stand, and how will you vote when the rights and healthcare of transgender youth are on the line?
I agree with everything you have said here. Where I see a problem is how woefully uninformed and uneducated the voting public, political parties and individual candidates are about transgender people, issues, needs, facts- etc. I understood sexual orientation (only after I reached adulthood) as a spectrum vs. a binary concept.
I also didn’t have any experience or education about gender identity, except that I knew transgender people were in the world alongside me.
I didn’t truly understand trans-ness in all its dimensions and variety until my own child came out to me. I had no idea before that just how little I understood about the gender identity spectrum.
So many people in this world are afraid of what they don’t understand. They’re afraid of what’s different. They’re scared when their understanding is jolted by new ideas and information.
This is true with gender identity, sexual orientation, racial, ethnic, religious, political, cultural and social differences.
When I was youngsters in public school, I didn’t realize it at the time, but I found out later on that a teacher could be fired for coming out as homosexual. Some of the most dedicated, brilliant, beloved teachers I had, likely stayed closeted for fear of losing their jobs, amongst other injustices, indignities and oppressions. Homophobia was rampant (and still is today in many places) but we have made great strides towards changing public opinion.
Now, we’re going through the same agonizing process with gender identity. It’s going to take time, effort, energy, patience and commitment to get the respect, appreciation, acceptance, inclusion, equity and justice our cherished beloved tans folks deserve. We shall overcome, as long as we don’t give up! But I don’t think it’s going to happen in one election cycle.
You've been thrown into this issue very recently, and you don't have the benefit of knowing our long history. That's no fault of yours, because our history isn't recorded very well or told very often. We're even now re-discovering much of it, thanks to historians in our own community.
I've been fighting for transgender (and LGBTQ) rights, off and on, for 3 decades now. One constant theme has been that we need to be patient and keep telling our stories - that more education is needed, so that we will become better understood and appreciated.
And now, with the events of the past decade, I can tell you this will never happen in that way - with patient persistence and calm, educating voices. That is for one very important reason: Our voices are too small, and we are so easily out-shouted. We cannot even begin to match the hundreds of millions of dollars in hate propaganda that surfaces every election season. Only a minority of Americans are aware of knowing a transgender person, but EVERY American has seen the anti-trans attack ads, at least dozens of times per season, even if they try to avoid them.
I can tell you that people know far LESS about trans people today than when I transitioned in the mid 1990's. Back in that day, if you told someone you were transgender, they would look at you funny and say, "transWHAT?"
I can also tell you this: I and other trans activists been patiently educating for around three decades now, and that is far longer than most lawmakers even stay in office. If we can't get through to them during their entire tenure in office, then we can't get through, PERIOD. Every time a lawmaker leaves office, we start over again. It's like Groundhog Day.
My assessment is this: The ONLY paths forward that I can envision are (1) one that makes us very visible ON OUR OWN TERMS or (2) a path such as we had in the aughts and early teens in which our more numerous allies still spoke out in earnest on our behalf. However, the path we are on leads nowhere. I can promise you that. Our approach must change, or we will never be free.
" The ONLY paths forward that I can envision are (1) one that makes us very visible ON OUR OWN TERMS or (2) a path such as we had in the aughts and early teens in which our more numerous allies still spoke out in earnest on our behalf. However, the path we are on leads nowhere. I can promise you that. Our approach must change, or we will never be free."
What impact do you think GenZ will have on this given 30% selfID as LGBTQIA? I also read recently that in 2028 Genz+Millenians will make up over half the electorate for the first time.
My hope has been that as these younger genertions become the center of gravity for policical power, despite the past history of political groups prioritizing LGB, the dynamic might be different because while to older generations of LGB we are "wierd" the younger generations grew up with trans kids in their schools.
Oh my! That's a good question. I've learned not to make predictions about the younger generations because they usually surprise me. I suspect predicting these generations has something to do with the alignment of the planets, and the sunspot cycle, but I still haven't figured it out.
GenZ is a very polarized generation, to be sure. There's an unsettlingly high level of support among GenZ men for the right and far-right - a cultural phenomenon that would be completely alien to my generation. GenZ women, on the other hand, tend to support the left and far left.
I think you're right that GenZ has more of a personal understanding of trans people, along with GenAlpha. My fear with GenAlpha is that they will have grown up in a culture that has normalized anti-trans. Perhaps GenZ won't be as persuaded by the anti-trans BS.
I do hope that there is a strong turnout of GenZ, because they need to start taking the reins of power as older generations retire. Perhaps there could be a wave of progressivism ahead. I certainly hope so. But like I say, I'm reluctant to make predictions, because I'm usually wrong! ;-)
We’re strangers in an environment where all we know of one another is a name, or nickname. Maybe a tiny little photo. Maybe a sentence or two of bio. Maybe nothing at all.
Maybe it’s real. Maybe all of it is fake. I have no clue how to tell the difference.
Anonymity is safety. Speaking for only myself: anonymity is also really confusing.
I didn’t know anything about you-
I thought maybe you were a bot or troll trying to provoke an argument. I couldn’t have been more wrong.
I can’t figure out how to have context for the people I’m engaging with.
You took the time to bring me with you, into your life and journey.
I can’t imagine the countless times you’ve had to endure repeating yourself to people like me. I made wrong assumptions. So regrettable. I apologize.
I don’t know if I deserved that much effort, but I am grateful to you for sharing your experience with me.
It must be exhausting to have to deal with a world that doesn’t understand- but even more daunting- does not even want to try to understand. A world actively seeking to harm you. I wish we could MAKE IT STOP. This is not the world you or I want to be living in. 😔😮💨😭
I’m 64 years old, scared, and tired. Fear and fatigue is not a solid place to start from.
Thats what this malicious, hateful federal regime wants. To create confusion fear, anger, division- CHAOS.
I reacted emotionally. Ironically, you were telling the truth of your lived experience.
You’ve lived through decades experiencing hate, being unheard, invalidated, misunderstood, AND having to explain /educate/combat misinformation.
My intention is to be an ally and advocate. That intention often doesn’t match up with my impact.
When a comment alarms and activates me, I will try to pause, and regulate myself, before reflexively chiming in.
Thank you. Yes, it's exhausting. Yes, you definitely deserve the effort as a parent of a trans person! IMO, you're one of our own.
I'm 65, scared, and tired, and I absolutely hear you. I understand now why my wording might have triggered your reaction, but it wasn't obvious to me before. It all has to do with the ambiguity of language that our adversaries are trying to create.
Anyway, thank you for your kind note, and thank you for being an ally and advocate! No apology is necessary. Even with all the uncertainty over our futures, I still hold out hope that we can work together to build a better world for those who follow us.
Most people haven’t any knowledge of or about transgender they just hear the BULLSHIT put out by the politicians and others spout and also have very little or no understanding just need a group or someone to go against
I’m a pragmatist. My 2 cents: Paxton is equivalent to Hitler. He wants to eliminate the existence of trans people, and prosecute the parents of trans children and doctors who treat trans clients.
Talarico may not be perfect, but he is a million times better than Paxton on trans issues. So if you don’t want Hitler representing you in Texas, vote for Talerico. Not voting for Talerico is like voting for Hitler.
There's a concept in evolutionary biology called an "adaptive landscape," in which the higher a species can climb, the better off it will be. The simplest rule for improving one's condition is simply to keep walking uphill; however, that might just take you to the top of a mound, where you become stuck. A better strategy is to look around and find a taller mound, and then walk down and up to reach the top of the taller mound. The paradox is that there might be a large mountain where you would be much better off, but to get there, there is a deep valley to cross. Ordinary evolutionary forces (mutational steps) can perhaps get a species from mound to mound, but often not across a valley to a high summit. This is why no species can ever be "perfect."
The inverse of that might be hydraulic engineering, in which water flow is carefully channeled with man-made structures to go where we want it to go. So instead of a mountain stream eventually reaching the ocean, it might get diverted into an artificial lake, where it is stuck.
However you want to view it, trans people are caught up in this sort of process. The easiest, most achievable objective is simply to elect a Democrat who doesn't support us, with the hope that eventually they might. And friend, I've been stuck in that artificial lake for decades, waiting for the dam to be opened so that I can reach the ocean! That path isn't really working for us.
At this point, perhaps the only path forward, that will lead to progress for our community, is to break or breach the dam, because we should have learned by now that nobody is going to open the spill gates for us.
It looks like he figured out that no matter his position, he'll be attacked exactly the same way by the right. But depending on his position, he doesn't have to alienate important segments of his base.
I still want to hear why he wants boys to have boobs.
I read in a Politico email that Gina Hinojosa (candidate for governor) has taken a different approach: She's just refusing to talk about "culture wars." She says her pronouns are mom, Texan, and soon-to-be governor. I much prefer her approach!
I tried to find the legislation - in which he voted in favor of a national ban on surgeries and hormone blockers. He said in an article I did find that he was against these interventions for minors. I don’t agree with his position at all. There shouldn’t be any national ban on care for transgender minors. I’m still appalled that any healthcare decisions, from the right to choose to terminate a pregnancy, to the life affirming care for transgender people are being politicized.
I don’t agree with a government making decisions about any medical issues. They are not medical experts, they are political candidates.
It is still not a useful thing to imply that a candidate wants boys to have boobs. Statements like that don’t clarify anything. I believe his vote 🗳️ is a mistake. I am grief stricken about how uninformed and misunderstood trans healthcare is in our country and across the globe.
I’m not defending his actions.
I just don’t see how reducing his vote to saying he wants boys to have boobs is productive.
"I just don’t see how reducing his vote to saying he wants boys to have boobs is productive."
Because for reasons that escape me, people don't seem to understand that denying a trans boy puberty blockers, hormone replacement therapy, and surgery leads to this inevitable outcome. Therefore it seems to require explaining in simple terms that people understand. Perhaps I should have said he wants TRANS boys to have boobs. I'm sorry I wasn't clearer.
He says that he supports banning surgery on minors. That means "boys with boobs." He has not retracted or refined that position, so I think he still wants "boys with boobs." My wording, to which you object, is simply putting a pin in a hostile political position and looking at it for what it is, without the sugar-coating.
PS It's super insulting when you call an academic and veteran trans activist uneducated. I will give you the grace that you didn't afford me, because I think you meant well.
Please don't misgender Texan. If mom says soon to be governor pronouns are mom, Texan, and soon-to-be governor, we should respect that no matter how silly it sounds.
Yes. I also do not want to get into a habit of disregarding people's stated pronouns when it's "obvious" that they aren't serious. But that is secondary to having fun with language. :)
James Talarico is obviously wrong to support a ban on transition-related surgeries for young folks. Such surgeries are not part of the standard protocol for treatment and so are very uncommon, but a ban is rigid and absolute; it prevents surgery being done even in a situation where it would be the proper treatment for that particular person. A really really bad idea.
But if I were him, I would not only say that, I would note the hypocrisy involved: The proposed bans often apply only to surgery done for transition and so put no limits on surgery for cis boys suffering from gynecomastia. Same surgery, same risks, same goal (feel more secure in a male identity), different treatment.
And as for his statement about sports, which was better, in addition to saying he's prepared to look to the leagues involved to set standards to protect safety and fairness, he should emphasize that this is something that sports leagues do all the time.
“Nonetheless, his opponents still flooded the airwaves with attack ads claiming he “voted to spend our tax dollars on sex change surgeries for kids””
Are these the ads Musk is running? They’re running in Ohio but I’m not sure they’re landing. The trans girls in sports is one thing — normies get sucked into that pretty easily — but most independents and persuadable voters aren’t going to fall for this nonsense.
Yeah, I believe that's the language used in the Musk ads. I've seen several now. They're all essentially the same and make the same claims, regardless of candidate.
Popular Information broke down the votes referenced in the flurry of ads:
Picking up on a strategy from Elon Musk’s America PAC, a new MAGA Inc ad (formally branded “No Going Back” to conceal its sponsor) says Alaska Democratic Senate nominee Mary Peltola “supports using your money to provide sex changes to minors.”
It shifts the claim before it tries to back it up, saying, “Time and again, Peltola voted against prohibiting taxpayer funded sex changes for minors.”
These procedures almost never happen and none of the ads claims check out. The ad quickly flashes 3 votes it knows no viewers will be able to investigate.
#262, 6/13/24: This one banned the military health care plan, TRICARE, from providing hormones or transition surgeries for ALL AGES. It was not about minors and TRICARE already was banned from providing these surgeries to anyone. Peltola voted NO but it had no impact on surgeries for minors.
#275, 6/13/24: This one was a ban on transition procedures for minors through the military’s Exceptional Family Member Program (EFMP). EFMP is not a health plan and does not provide procedures so the whole thing is nonsensical. Peltola voted NO, but again, no impact on surgical procedures for minors.
#328, 7/14/23: Final passage of the entire FY 2024 defense bill. Peltola objected to many aspects of the bill. She voted NO, but there was no impact on surgeries for minors, which were already banned.
This is all a bit complex and hard to understand and that’s the point. MAGA Inc is manufacturing an issue, inventing a position for Peltola and then using it as the center of its case against her.
I’ve seen similar ads this week paid for by the GOP SLF (Senate Leadership Fund). Loose use of leadership…
They’re basically characterizing a refusal to vote for a blanket federal ban as voting for “children sex changes.”
I’m surprised the Dems haven’t come up with a basic ad stating that Republicans want to control our medical decisions and come between families and their doctors, and that Dems refuse to tell families what medical decisions they can make. OTOH, why give it any oxygen when most voters don’t really care.
I think the best sort of ad Democrats can run is something that lays out real issues that Dems are interested in - cost of living, forever wars in the Middle East, keeping medical decisions between a patient and doctor, food safety, reining in data centers and AI, etc. And Republicans are only interested in made-up culture war issues and giveaways for billionaires. Vote for the serious party, because serious times demand serious solutions. Something like that.
I'd probably make that choice too, but I'd make damned sure Talarico knew he was on a VERY short leash with me and that if he didn't change his tune, I'd work very hard to support a primary challenger 6 years from now.
There is no room for the kind of fairweather support Talarico is offering here. Any capitulation to the GOP on the rights of our community is a betrayal.
I truly want politicians to start saying this very clear statement: "Anybody who spends any time thinking about the genitals of a child needs to get help and to stop, immediately. It is not normal, okay or healthy for adults to obsess about what children look like underneath their clothes. No child is safe growing up with this disgusting cultural fixation about their naked bodies. It's time to move on from this, for the sake of our children."
Sounds like an effectively crafted message!
Texan here. Still infuriated by his refusal to support trans people.
I grew up in Texas and have (to the heartbreak of my mom) not felt safe there the last few years. I was beginning to hope between him and Hinojosa...but the just craven nonsense that doesn't even get him "untagged" from trans people...
Mainstream democrats are completely lost without a map. They're going in circles trying to thread a needle just right so that trans people and transphobes both vote for them.
They all lack the principles and competency of Abdul.
Talarico had a chance to go full transphobe, like Seth Moulton or Marcy Kaptur or Amy Acton. He didn't. He stood up for trans kids, even if imperfectly. And he's running against Ken Paxton, who might just be the second most corrupt politician in this country and is certainly one of the most dangerous to trans kids.
If I lived in Texas (heaven forfend), he'd have my vote. No question. We'll see how he does if he gets to the Senate, which seems likely based on recent polling.
I agree. I don't think he's against us. I think he's playing word games. And actually, I wish the truly dangerous Dems using "men in women's sports" language would learn something from his approach, like Sand and Turek in Iowa, and Amy Achtung in Ohio.
I think you're right about the word games, and his history does suggest he supports us. That said, when politicians play word games, they can pin themselves down to certain positions. When he said he would support a national ban on surgery for minors, that committed him to voting "yes" for such a ban or doing a "flip-flop." I SUSPECT what he was thinking when he made that policy announcement was that he would oppose sexual reassignment surgery on minors, which is not a horrible position. But I don't think he was thinking about top surgery for trans boys.
We can hope he "flip-flops" on that position, citing that he meant reassignment surgery, not top surgery - something that even cis girls sometimes get (i.e. breast reduction surgery). Maybe he has a flip-flop path already mapped out, or maybe he just carelessly drove his bus into a giant pothole. We won't know until he actually casts a vote on this issue.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Sarah!
I think these are very good observations.
To your point in another comment about Talrico being on a "short leash" with you -
Very similarly, I've been thinking of Talrico as being on a "watchlist". I think he has good intentions, so I'm largely giving him the benefit of the doubt, but's positioned himself right at the edge of the anti-trans line IMO. If he moves another inch, I think he'll have crossed it.
If I were in Texas I would not be voting for him based on his comments about trying to get the government involved in taking away Healthcare from trans kids in order to placate and side with a faction of hateful transphobes. Period. I'm not voting for a Democrat majority. I'm voting for freedom for trans people. Democrats can choose positions that make me vote for them or not. Its up to them.
I totally get your position, and I don't disagree with it. We have only bad choices and worse choices. I would argue, though, that we've already lost this election with regard to trans issues. Even if Dems take back control, there won't be a majority in Congress that supports us - no matter how we vote.
I would argue that we should regroup and rethink our path forward. We tend to think in terms of elections - choosing between the candidates offered to us. This is not a good approach, when those choices only end up as bad ones.
What we need to do instead is to fight our battles hard in the PRIMARIES. We need to find candidates who are friendly on our issues, or even better, we need to run candidates from our own community. And then we need to GET OUT THE VOTE like our lives depend on it. That's how we put a good candidate on the ballot in the general elections.
This is an especially effective strategy in "safe" Democratic districts where we've STILL been thrown under the bus (for no good reason). Essentially, whoever wins the Democratic primary wins the election. If we're not taking our fight to the primary, then we're just going to be late showing up to a battle that has already been won or lost.
Personally, I'm voting for the Democrats this election (and not saying you're doing the wrong thing by voting against them). There are other issues that deeply affect my children and grandchildren, and this election I'm voting for their interests. But in subsequent elections, I'm throwing my efforts into the primaries. THAT is where we have to win.
I've seen pictures of young girls who are trans and thought, she looks just like every other young girl who just wants to play sports with their friends. I think other people think that every young girls who are trans must be twice as tall and weigh twice as much as their friends. That is no how biology works. Often the girls sprout up taller than the boys who have a later growth spurt.
I also realize that some cis girls with larger body types might just fit that feared size differential. With Talarico's case-by-case-if-it-may -cause-injury-to-others, will we have to tell the cis girl with the large body type she can't play? Or how about the young cis boy with a small body type, that he's too small for football? He's still discriminating unless those cis kids can be banned too. Anyway, he's a politition and they need to be able to weasel if they want to be elected. (my apologies to weasels everywhere for that analogy).
Any bill will not target cis kids what do e er. It will only be targeted to tran kids and more specifically only trans feminine kids
Will trans masculine kids get caught up? Possibly but they will not be the target for any sports bans.
It's just like any discussion around puberty blockers or any type of top surgeries (including gynocomastia). It is only talked about being banded for trans kids.
"Talarico still pledges to support a national ban on surgical interventions that help transgender youth, which may include top surgery or hormone implants." <-- An evil stance I hope he has a "change of heart" about as soon as he is elected.
" Talarico has said he opposes “trans athletes playing in girls’ sports if it endangers safety or fairness”" <-- And why won't specify? I realize that means he is pinned down, but voters aren't impressed with obfuscation.
Thank you for the reporting, Baum.
I would not have supported them in the primary against Crockett had I known their views. This irritates me to no end. My only hope is he doesn't back that religious bus up and finish us. In other news Hinojosa seems to have a chance against abbot.
I’m not in Texas, but if I had been Jasmine Crockett would have been my first choice. She is brilliant and courageous. She isn’t afraid to speak truth to power. Hers is the energy we need more of. IMHO
Fuck transphobes. Every one of them. I don’t care what party they are.
I worry deeply about Democrats running for office in the midterms who have made statements concerning transgender youth and access to gender-affirming care. The question is not simply whether Democrats regain control of Congress—it is what kind of legislation will they support once they get there?
Take Henry Cuellar or James Talarico as examples: How would they vote on legislation protecting transgender youth? Would they support access to medically appropriate hormone therapy? Would they support protections for families, doctors, and young people seeking care? These are not abstract questions. The answers could directly affect the lives and futures of transgender youth.
We already know where many Republican lawmakers stand on these issues. That makes it even more important to know where every candidate—Democrat or Republican—stands before we give them our support.
If Democrats regain control but some of their own members oppose meaningful protections for transgender youth, then what exactly have we accomplished? A change in party control means little if transgender youth are still left without the protections and medically appropriate care they need.
Transgender youth deserve more than promises. They deserve lawmakers willing to protect their dignity, privacy, safety, and access to appropriate medical care.
Before November, candidates need to answer clearly: Where do you stand, and how will you vote when the rights and healthcare of transgender youth are on the line?
I agree with everything you have said here. Where I see a problem is how woefully uninformed and uneducated the voting public, political parties and individual candidates are about transgender people, issues, needs, facts- etc. I understood sexual orientation (only after I reached adulthood) as a spectrum vs. a binary concept.
I also didn’t have any experience or education about gender identity, except that I knew transgender people were in the world alongside me.
I didn’t truly understand trans-ness in all its dimensions and variety until my own child came out to me. I had no idea before that just how little I understood about the gender identity spectrum.
So many people in this world are afraid of what they don’t understand. They’re afraid of what’s different. They’re scared when their understanding is jolted by new ideas and information.
This is true with gender identity, sexual orientation, racial, ethnic, religious, political, cultural and social differences.
When I was youngsters in public school, I didn’t realize it at the time, but I found out later on that a teacher could be fired for coming out as homosexual. Some of the most dedicated, brilliant, beloved teachers I had, likely stayed closeted for fear of losing their jobs, amongst other injustices, indignities and oppressions. Homophobia was rampant (and still is today in many places) but we have made great strides towards changing public opinion.
Now, we’re going through the same agonizing process with gender identity. It’s going to take time, effort, energy, patience and commitment to get the respect, appreciation, acceptance, inclusion, equity and justice our cherished beloved tans folks deserve. We shall overcome, as long as we don’t give up! But I don’t think it’s going to happen in one election cycle.
You've been thrown into this issue very recently, and you don't have the benefit of knowing our long history. That's no fault of yours, because our history isn't recorded very well or told very often. We're even now re-discovering much of it, thanks to historians in our own community.
I've been fighting for transgender (and LGBTQ) rights, off and on, for 3 decades now. One constant theme has been that we need to be patient and keep telling our stories - that more education is needed, so that we will become better understood and appreciated.
And now, with the events of the past decade, I can tell you this will never happen in that way - with patient persistence and calm, educating voices. That is for one very important reason: Our voices are too small, and we are so easily out-shouted. We cannot even begin to match the hundreds of millions of dollars in hate propaganda that surfaces every election season. Only a minority of Americans are aware of knowing a transgender person, but EVERY American has seen the anti-trans attack ads, at least dozens of times per season, even if they try to avoid them.
I can tell you that people know far LESS about trans people today than when I transitioned in the mid 1990's. Back in that day, if you told someone you were transgender, they would look at you funny and say, "transWHAT?"
I can also tell you this: I and other trans activists been patiently educating for around three decades now, and that is far longer than most lawmakers even stay in office. If we can't get through to them during their entire tenure in office, then we can't get through, PERIOD. Every time a lawmaker leaves office, we start over again. It's like Groundhog Day.
My assessment is this: The ONLY paths forward that I can envision are (1) one that makes us very visible ON OUR OWN TERMS or (2) a path such as we had in the aughts and early teens in which our more numerous allies still spoke out in earnest on our behalf. However, the path we are on leads nowhere. I can promise you that. Our approach must change, or we will never be free.
Sarah,
Again, thanks for the insightful assessment!
" The ONLY paths forward that I can envision are (1) one that makes us very visible ON OUR OWN TERMS or (2) a path such as we had in the aughts and early teens in which our more numerous allies still spoke out in earnest on our behalf. However, the path we are on leads nowhere. I can promise you that. Our approach must change, or we will never be free."
What impact do you think GenZ will have on this given 30% selfID as LGBTQIA? I also read recently that in 2028 Genz+Millenians will make up over half the electorate for the first time.
My hope has been that as these younger genertions become the center of gravity for policical power, despite the past history of political groups prioritizing LGB, the dynamic might be different because while to older generations of LGB we are "wierd" the younger generations grew up with trans kids in their schools.
Oh my! That's a good question. I've learned not to make predictions about the younger generations because they usually surprise me. I suspect predicting these generations has something to do with the alignment of the planets, and the sunspot cycle, but I still haven't figured it out.
GenZ is a very polarized generation, to be sure. There's an unsettlingly high level of support among GenZ men for the right and far-right - a cultural phenomenon that would be completely alien to my generation. GenZ women, on the other hand, tend to support the left and far left.
I think you're right that GenZ has more of a personal understanding of trans people, along with GenAlpha. My fear with GenAlpha is that they will have grown up in a culture that has normalized anti-trans. Perhaps GenZ won't be as persuaded by the anti-trans BS.
I do hope that there is a strong turnout of GenZ, because they need to start taking the reins of power as older generations retire. Perhaps there could be a wave of progressivism ahead. I certainly hope so. But like I say, I'm reluctant to make predictions, because I'm usually wrong! ;-)
Thanks for sharing this!
Dear Sarah,
We’re strangers in an environment where all we know of one another is a name, or nickname. Maybe a tiny little photo. Maybe a sentence or two of bio. Maybe nothing at all.
Maybe it’s real. Maybe all of it is fake. I have no clue how to tell the difference.
Anonymity is safety. Speaking for only myself: anonymity is also really confusing.
I didn’t know anything about you-
I thought maybe you were a bot or troll trying to provoke an argument. I couldn’t have been more wrong.
I can’t figure out how to have context for the people I’m engaging with.
You took the time to bring me with you, into your life and journey.
I can’t imagine the countless times you’ve had to endure repeating yourself to people like me. I made wrong assumptions. So regrettable. I apologize.
I don’t know if I deserved that much effort, but I am grateful to you for sharing your experience with me.
It must be exhausting to have to deal with a world that doesn’t understand- but even more daunting- does not even want to try to understand. A world actively seeking to harm you. I wish we could MAKE IT STOP. This is not the world you or I want to be living in. 😔😮💨😭
I’m 64 years old, scared, and tired. Fear and fatigue is not a solid place to start from.
Thats what this malicious, hateful federal regime wants. To create confusion fear, anger, division- CHAOS.
I reacted emotionally. Ironically, you were telling the truth of your lived experience.
You’ve lived through decades experiencing hate, being unheard, invalidated, misunderstood, AND having to explain /educate/combat misinformation.
My intention is to be an ally and advocate. That intention often doesn’t match up with my impact.
When a comment alarms and activates me, I will try to pause, and regulate myself, before reflexively chiming in.
Thank you. Yes, it's exhausting. Yes, you definitely deserve the effort as a parent of a trans person! IMO, you're one of our own.
I'm 65, scared, and tired, and I absolutely hear you. I understand now why my wording might have triggered your reaction, but it wasn't obvious to me before. It all has to do with the ambiguity of language that our adversaries are trying to create.
Anyway, thank you for your kind note, and thank you for being an ally and advocate! No apology is necessary. Even with all the uncertainty over our futures, I still hold out hope that we can work together to build a better world for those who follow us.
Peace :-)
Most people haven’t any knowledge of or about transgender they just hear the BULLSHIT put out by the politicians and others spout and also have very little or no understanding just need a group or someone to go against
I’m a pragmatist. My 2 cents: Paxton is equivalent to Hitler. He wants to eliminate the existence of trans people, and prosecute the parents of trans children and doctors who treat trans clients.
Talarico may not be perfect, but he is a million times better than Paxton on trans issues. So if you don’t want Hitler representing you in Texas, vote for Talerico. Not voting for Talerico is like voting for Hitler.
There's a concept in evolutionary biology called an "adaptive landscape," in which the higher a species can climb, the better off it will be. The simplest rule for improving one's condition is simply to keep walking uphill; however, that might just take you to the top of a mound, where you become stuck. A better strategy is to look around and find a taller mound, and then walk down and up to reach the top of the taller mound. The paradox is that there might be a large mountain where you would be much better off, but to get there, there is a deep valley to cross. Ordinary evolutionary forces (mutational steps) can perhaps get a species from mound to mound, but often not across a valley to a high summit. This is why no species can ever be "perfect."
The inverse of that might be hydraulic engineering, in which water flow is carefully channeled with man-made structures to go where we want it to go. So instead of a mountain stream eventually reaching the ocean, it might get diverted into an artificial lake, where it is stuck.
However you want to view it, trans people are caught up in this sort of process. The easiest, most achievable objective is simply to elect a Democrat who doesn't support us, with the hope that eventually they might. And friend, I've been stuck in that artificial lake for decades, waiting for the dam to be opened so that I can reach the ocean! That path isn't really working for us.
At this point, perhaps the only path forward, that will lead to progress for our community, is to break or breach the dam, because we should have learned by now that nobody is going to open the spill gates for us.
That's my 2c. Together we have 4c. ;-)
It looks like he figured out that no matter his position, he'll be attacked exactly the same way by the right. But depending on his position, he doesn't have to alienate important segments of his base.
I still want to hear why he wants boys to have boobs.
I read in a Politico email that Gina Hinojosa (candidate for governor) has taken a different approach: She's just refusing to talk about "culture wars." She says her pronouns are mom, Texan, and soon-to-be governor. I much prefer her approach!
“I still want to hear why he wants boys to have boobs.” That statement is offensive, insensitive, uneducated and factually incorrect .
Tallirico never said that.
No candidate has ever said that sentence.
Your statement is hostile and insulting to transgender people, and also to all of us who know, love and support transgender people.
He never said it, but he voted for a surgery ban that will result in more trans boys having boobs.
I tried to find the legislation - in which he voted in favor of a national ban on surgeries and hormone blockers. He said in an article I did find that he was against these interventions for minors. I don’t agree with his position at all. There shouldn’t be any national ban on care for transgender minors. I’m still appalled that any healthcare decisions, from the right to choose to terminate a pregnancy, to the life affirming care for transgender people are being politicized.
I don’t agree with a government making decisions about any medical issues. They are not medical experts, they are political candidates.
It is still not a useful thing to imply that a candidate wants boys to have boobs. Statements like that don’t clarify anything. I believe his vote 🗳️ is a mistake. I am grief stricken about how uninformed and misunderstood trans healthcare is in our country and across the globe.
I’m not defending his actions.
I just don’t see how reducing his vote to saying he wants boys to have boobs is productive.
"I just don’t see how reducing his vote to saying he wants boys to have boobs is productive."
Because for reasons that escape me, people don't seem to understand that denying a trans boy puberty blockers, hormone replacement therapy, and surgery leads to this inevitable outcome. Therefore it seems to require explaining in simple terms that people understand. Perhaps I should have said he wants TRANS boys to have boobs. I'm sorry I wasn't clearer.
He says that he supports banning surgery on minors. That means "boys with boobs." He has not retracted or refined that position, so I think he still wants "boys with boobs." My wording, to which you object, is simply putting a pin in a hostile political position and looking at it for what it is, without the sugar-coating.
PS It's super insulting when you call an academic and veteran trans activist uneducated. I will give you the grace that you didn't afford me, because I think you meant well.
Please don't misgender Texan. If mom says soon to be governor pronouns are mom, Texan, and soon-to-be governor, we should respect that no matter how silly it sounds.
I'm going to assume you're being funny. ;-) Sadly, it's getting harder to tell these days.
Yes. I also do not want to get into a habit of disregarding people's stated pronouns when it's "obvious" that they aren't serious. But that is secondary to having fun with language. :)
James Talarico is obviously wrong to support a ban on transition-related surgeries for young folks. Such surgeries are not part of the standard protocol for treatment and so are very uncommon, but a ban is rigid and absolute; it prevents surgery being done even in a situation where it would be the proper treatment for that particular person. A really really bad idea.
But if I were him, I would not only say that, I would note the hypocrisy involved: The proposed bans often apply only to surgery done for transition and so put no limits on surgery for cis boys suffering from gynecomastia. Same surgery, same risks, same goal (feel more secure in a male identity), different treatment.
And as for his statement about sports, which was better, in addition to saying he's prepared to look to the leagues involved to set standards to protect safety and fairness, he should emphasize that this is something that sports leagues do all the time.
“Nonetheless, his opponents still flooded the airwaves with attack ads claiming he “voted to spend our tax dollars on sex change surgeries for kids””
Are these the ads Musk is running? They’re running in Ohio but I’m not sure they’re landing. The trans girls in sports is one thing — normies get sucked into that pretty easily — but most independents and persuadable voters aren’t going to fall for this nonsense.
Yeah, I believe that's the language used in the Musk ads. I've seen several now. They're all essentially the same and make the same claims, regardless of candidate.
Popular Information broke down the votes referenced in the flurry of ads:
Picking up on a strategy from Elon Musk’s America PAC, a new MAGA Inc ad (formally branded “No Going Back” to conceal its sponsor) says Alaska Democratic Senate nominee Mary Peltola “supports using your money to provide sex changes to minors.”
It shifts the claim before it tries to back it up, saying, “Time and again, Peltola voted against prohibiting taxpayer funded sex changes for minors.”
These procedures almost never happen and none of the ads claims check out. The ad quickly flashes 3 votes it knows no viewers will be able to investigate.
#262, 6/13/24: This one banned the military health care plan, TRICARE, from providing hormones or transition surgeries for ALL AGES. It was not about minors and TRICARE already was banned from providing these surgeries to anyone. Peltola voted NO but it had no impact on surgeries for minors.
#275, 6/13/24: This one was a ban on transition procedures for minors through the military’s Exceptional Family Member Program (EFMP). EFMP is not a health plan and does not provide procedures so the whole thing is nonsensical. Peltola voted NO, but again, no impact on surgical procedures for minors.
#328, 7/14/23: Final passage of the entire FY 2024 defense bill. Peltola objected to many aspects of the bill. She voted NO, but there was no impact on surgeries for minors, which were already banned.
This is all a bit complex and hard to understand and that’s the point. MAGA Inc is manufacturing an issue, inventing a position for Peltola and then using it as the center of its case against her.
I’ve seen similar ads this week paid for by the GOP SLF (Senate Leadership Fund). Loose use of leadership…
They’re basically characterizing a refusal to vote for a blanket federal ban as voting for “children sex changes.”
I’m surprised the Dems haven’t come up with a basic ad stating that Republicans want to control our medical decisions and come between families and their doctors, and that Dems refuse to tell families what medical decisions they can make. OTOH, why give it any oxygen when most voters don’t really care.
I think the best sort of ad Democrats can run is something that lays out real issues that Dems are interested in - cost of living, forever wars in the Middle East, keeping medical decisions between a patient and doctor, food safety, reining in data centers and AI, etc. And Republicans are only interested in made-up culture war issues and giveaways for billionaires. Vote for the serious party, because serious times demand serious solutions. Something like that.
I’m not a fan of what he said but I do know candidates sometimes say what they think they have to say to get elected.
At the end of the day the choice is Paxton or Talarico and if I was in Texas I’d vote for Talarico
I'd probably make that choice too, but I'd make damned sure Talarico knew he was on a VERY short leash with me and that if he didn't change his tune, I'd work very hard to support a primary challenger 6 years from now.
Glad some of the candidates are doing the right thing even if it’s a risk to their ambitions.
There is no room for the kind of fairweather support Talarico is offering here. Any capitulation to the GOP on the rights of our community is a betrayal.