Congresswoman Sarah McBride recently interviewed with Ezra Klein at the New York Times, where she advocated for a politics of appeasement when it comes to transgender people.
Once when I was being asked to serve on a board, I felt I was asked because I fit a certain demographic, gender, sexuality, race, etc., I was offended. My Bestie said to me ‘just because they want you as a ‘token’ doesn’t mean you have to act like one.’ She was right! I spoke up and questioned lots of activities, I wasn’t always polite, quiet women don’t make history. McBride seems to be quiet, acting like she is polite, maybe wanting to be a ‘token’?
I have now read Erin’s essay, over a hundred comments, then the full Klein interview, and finally Erin’s essay again. Erin’s essay certainly points out things in the interview that will be used by the very virulent right-wing anti-trans campaign. We are all up against a very powerful and hateful machine in most political areas, not only trans rights. They twist words all the time, they cite bogus “studies.” They rile up their constituents with the most absurd conspiracy narratives.
The comments here take Erin’s caveats and espouse an increasingly “pure” political agenda for trans rights, all the while increasingly vilifying Sarah McBride, until she is nearly being made out to be a MAGA, Project 25 ally.
We need to make a distinction between the dialog of activism and that of the working politician. Yes, we have our activists in Congress and, don’t get me wrong, they give a voice for all activists and play an important rôle in our political system, but there are also those (who are in VERY short supply these days) whose talents build bridges and who are able to accomplish change by riding a very fine line between warring factions. I believe Sarah McBride falls in the latter category. The MAGA forces have used the words of EVERYONE against us when they can, not only Sarah’s. As a groundbreaking icon she is a target of theirs. But let’s not also target her from this side of the debate. Really. Sarah McBride is not the enemy. Don’t let the MAGAs add fuel to our infighting. Rather, elect a second transgender person for Congress in 2026. In addition to hitting the streets.
Exactly. As I sit here watching one of the "keeper" movies in my collection, "42" (the story of Jackie Robinson), I'm reminded of what a strong illustration she used in that interview in its reference. Everyone in the community could stand to watch it-- again. https://youtu.be/HALfME0wjeU?si=lEwJfVkGbaU_ikOz
Excellent answer 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 while we are all on a slightly different page advocacy wise. Doing anything to promote trans rights. Whether leading from the front, advocating our politicians, educating people , one at a time. Or writing our stories , telling them on Substack or all the books about trans experiences, to just living your life. Our Resilience is our Resistance.
This is a disappointing review of Sarah McBride’s performance. Transgender rights have been slowly eroding for about eight years now and our strategies clearly aren’t working. My future as a transgender person is now hitched to a movement that sees any kind of nuance as betrayal and capitulation, which is absurd. Gay and lesbian people were able to win the Obergefell decision from a conservative court by following an organized strategy that strictly avoiding the flashpoint issues that transgender radicals embrace. Radicals prefer being righteous rather than being successful, and now a generation of trans youth will suffer as a result. It’s time for us to give up the victim mentality and take our position seriously, and Sarah McBride is showing us the way.
The reason transgender rights have been eroding for several years is mostly not because of anything trans people have done. It has mainly been the synergistic efforts and strong political wills of right wing think tanks, conservative billionaires, and Republican politicians to make it happen. It took several years and they worked hard at it, and they wanted it badly. This was largely a backlash inspired by (from their point of view) a defeat with Obergefell. In fact memos went out in the mid-2010s among conservative activists, stating that with gay marriage now off the table, they would start targeting trans people as the next move.
If trans activists have any “fault” here, it was not recognizing the risk of a serious backlash in the late 2010s and early 2020s, and not working harder and more proactively to counter it. Complacency hurt here.
Sandra, Well said, especially on the first part about there being a coordinated campaign to erode trans rights. I recoiled at the premise of this NYT interview/podcast because it blames the people suffering right now.
But only because no one outside of the transgender community, and our trained care providers, actually know what it is, the science behind it, the risk/benefit analysis that has gone into the implementation of the Standards of Care. There is NO veracity to the claim that such care is experimental, or that it presents unreasonable risks of irreversible mistakes. That IS the result of the evidence based science that supports the Standards of Care. But that fact is ignored or falsely represented again and again. Scientific evidence, much like "rights", is not and ought not be subject to popular political opinion. That is, unfortunately, where we are (and very much where the New York Times intends to keep us.)
I agree 100% Ella, and you hit the operative word (and position) that trans people will have to make to "win back" the argument: I've long said that the road to acceptance of this aspect of the animal kingdom--is the SCIENCE. We were winning the argument when we focused on bringing the public along on the science, because IT'S THERE! Where we lost them? One example is post-pubescent males playing in girl's/women's sports. Another is/was the pronoun purity test. My sense of where things went off the rails is not long after the 2015 Obergefell ruling, granting marriage equality. It almost seems as though that seismic, historical moment gave the trans community a bigger sense of vindication/validation than was rooted in the reality on the ground?
Trying to be subtle with your transphobia, Seth? “Post-pubescent boys playing” girls’ sports? Let’s edit that, shall we, since you’re a fan of SCIENCE, to “the very small percentage of transgender girls in k-12 schools -many of whom are on puberty blockers and/or HRT-playing on teams that align with their gender.” Professional sports are also continuing to assess the short- and long-term effects of HRT etc., on individual adult athletes. We will all know more in time as will individual sports. I don’t even know what “pronoun purity” means. Just use a person’s preferred pronouns. There. Easy. Done. Obergefell was a nice win for gays and lesbians, some - some - of whom have, historically, also been transphobic and non-supportive of any rights beyond those that assist gays and lesbians. Your last comment merely reflects what Klein and McBride appear to be advocating for: capitulating to perceived public opinion or polls at any one moment in time for the perceived good of the Democratic Party which, I would say, is perceived by many of us on the ground as being vastly out of touch, too old, too white, and not principled enough. This is why, if you are paying attention, Bernie Sanders and AOC are so popular. The Democrats missed a Very Large Boat that was in their Sights since before Reagan and they did not respond with enough conviction and force. I’m 60 years old. I remember HIV/AIDS and all the gays should, too. Don’t make transgender people alone pay for decades of lassez-faire on the part of too-cautious Democrats and Independents.
Who are the “transgender radicals”? And what is so radical about insisting we have a right to exist and be treated with dignity and respect? I don’t see anyone out here asking for anything more. I just want to go to a public restroom without having a mob of people telling me where they think I belong, or worse, calling the police while I pee because their perception of my gender makes them think I am a predator. Is that radical? Is it radical to want your trans kid to have all the opportunities other kids have? What are the “transgender radicals” out here doing?
I disagree with your assessment of Sarah. She's becoming just another politician only interested in her self preservation, forgetting where she came from or who she is.
Thank you for saying this. There is nuance in the issues that are being discussed. But to address any of that nuance, is to be labeled as “conceding” the point.
Is it “nuance” that my daughter’s surgery was canceled a week before it was scheduled? Is it “nuance” that CHLA just shut down the entire Transyouth Clinic, leaving over 2000 patients without care?
I’ve been ignoring this interview. I met Sarah years ago when my trans child was only 4. I admire her, but don’t believe she can speak for trans people of represent all trans people. I just don’t care what public opinion is when it comes to my child accessing needed medical care. I care about the medical research and professional opinions of her medical and mental health professionals.
Laura, you’re engaging in “whataboutism” nothing in my comment or the original comment I responded to referred to anything about the recent decision in the supreme court.
There is nuance in transgender women playing in sports, there is nuance in medical care for transgender youth. Is that nuance as far as cancelling surgery? Definitely not. But there is no clear cut yes or no answer.
I’m saying this as a transgender woman who has served in the military for 12 years, 8 of those as an out and open transgender person. I’m on the same end your daughter is, I’m losing my job because of an arbitrary policy decision.
But, that doesn’t mean we can’t discuss these topics as a community. If we can’t reach an agreement or understanding among ourselves then others will continue to decide our fate for us.
There is no nuance about trans women in sports or about trans care for adolescents. They are non-issues turned into issues by the right to create a gateway into graver and graver limitations of trans rights. And to divide us. Which is succeeding.
Laura, I appreciate where you’re coming from, and I share your frustration with how the right weaponizes these topics to erode both mine and your daughter’s rights. You’re absolutely right that many of these issues, like trans women in sports or youth care are magnified to stoke fear and division.
That said, I think saying “there is no nuance” is oversimplifying things. Not because the opposition’s concerns are always valid, we know they aren’t, but because the public perception of these topics is complex. If we refuse to acknowledge that complexity, we risk sounding just as dogmatic as those trying to erase us.
I’m not saying we give ground on basic rights. But we should be able to talk, among ourselves, about difficult issues like how to protect young people while also respecting parental rights, or how to ensure fairness in sports while affirming trans inclusion. If we can’t do that in our own spaces, we leave a vacuum that bad actors are eager to fill.
I say this not to argue, but to appeal for strategic solidarity. We don’t need to agree on every policy detail but we can’t let others define the terms of this debate for us.
Laura, you’re engaging in “whataboutism” nothing in my comment or the original comment I responded to referred to anything about the recent decision in the supreme court. "
Uhuh. Fuck you! What nuance? Spell it out! You haven't yet.
"There is nuance in transgender women playing in sports, there is nuance in medical care for transgender youth. Is that nuance as far as cancelling surgery? Definitely not. But there is no clear cut yes or no answer. "
Uhuh. The mistress of yes and no out one side of your mouth and then the other.
The majority of the readers here (certainly not all!) are younger, and didn't see the world that I saw in 1955 (when I had those inklings that nearly all trans people felt, and then denied due to the danger). We were making so much progress for people like your daughter. It will happen again, but not before a lot of pain.
I agree with you 100% Eve. As a 62 year old man (46,XY, AFAB, that is--intersex traits. I have accessed trans-related healthcare to address the lifetime of sex/gender incongruence), who's lived (not just heard about) the entire arc of life since DSM-III in 1973, when homosexuality was removed from the "list of mental disorders." I am impressed with McBride's maturity-- at 34 years old. Her wisdom is way beyond her years, and it's not "because of the efforts of the radical left" that she got where she is, but with that staid, mature, solid, balanced and calm approach. WWE cat fights or Jerry Springer reality-tv cosplaying are NOT strength, do NOTHING to advance the true cause, and she's right--no matter what, we'd be portrayed as the ones at fault. I don't think most on this comment string have, nor will even bother to listen to the entire Klein interview. If they were objective and committed warriors like many of us, they would.
The only thing I'd like to see her focus a bit more on, on the road to winning back the argument (which, let's face it, is likely a very long time away)? The SCIENCE, that is....we were winning when we had the science, rooted in sex development and the rights of all "God's children" at the forefront of the discussion for acceptance, NOT arguments about closely held beliefs, SPORTS, and certainly not arguing over purity tests about placing pronouns in a professional profile (which I would never do, and managed to escape the pressure sitting on various professional boards). I think that her perspectives are spot on-- about where we are now, and WHY. I could see it coming a hundred miles away as even support group Admin's were increasingly policing gendered language as early as 2017-18. The only place for me was to check out of such groups, which became ALL of them by 2022. Thank God for healing and getting finally to live life finally aligned in mind and body; something I never dreamed could even be possible as a bright, inquisitive but melancholy kid. Now...to face this backlash. Activism has its place, but the real work is done in properly communicating, and yes, bringing along public opinion because after all, it's public opinion that comes to bear on court opinions, and therefore...the law.
This is so beautiful, thank you for sharing all this with me, it’s good to connect. Yes, we need to reclaim the narrative, and not be dragged into debates that were already set up so that we could never win.
Science is a good one, we should be asking for more and better regulation of GAC for minors, not less. Personally, I want to see us focus on privacy and safety, rather than trying to get people to understand being transgender—we don’t need them to tell us their pronouns, just show basic human respect to all.
I don’t think it was trans activists or even so-called “transgender radicals” who were pushing people to share their pronouns. I think it was our allies trying to change the world to make it a safer place for us to just be. I have been working in trans advocacy spaces for well over a decade and putting pronouns in signature spaces was never a priority. It also wasn’t my experience that trans people initiated intros with pronouns. It was my experience and understanding that it was cisgender people so they wouldn’t make a mistake and feel bad about misgendering people like me whose gender expression is a bit ambiguous. I think this is a misconception - that it was our leaders and radicals in our community that pushed this narrative. Although it was well-intended by our allies, it led to those who were not as allied to feel like they had to make changes to accommodate us, which contributed to the backlash. I don’t think anyone is to blame though.
I do think that it is really divisive to vaguely label members of our community “transgender radicals” and then blame them for the backlash against our community. There is a real problem in our movement when we demonize and alienate each other, while giving credence and power to anti-trans narratives. Our moderate leaders, most of whom are not trans, did that with Biden’s compromise on trans children playing sports and the anti-trans movement ran with it. IMO, that capitulation basically opened the door wide open for this backlash to take hold.
That’s a really good point, and you’re right. The phrase transgender radicals falsely indicates that the radicals are transgender. That wasn’t what I was trying to say, but I did say it and you’re right to point it out and correct it.
I’m trying to describe people who advocate for transgender rights from a radical perspective, and it is definitely the case that the majority of those people are not transgender themselves. Perhaps a better term would’ve been pro-transgender radicals.
I am trying to divisive though. I want to create a division between the majority of transgender people and the radical voices who co-opt transgender issues as a token of victimhood to suit their desire to perform radicalism. They are good people, but deeply misguided, and should not speak for all of us.
I respectfully disagree. What has happened and is happening to trans rights
has nothing to do with progressive or radical within any population of people - immigrants, Blacks, workers, the poor, , LGBtQIA+, The tide was turning in favor of trans rights - as shown by court cases as recently as 2021 - and the tide turned after the horrendous decision to overturn Roe v Wade with the Dobbs decision. The theological and political extreme right wing together created a strategy to reverse decades of precedent and Constitutional law to next attack everything from books and teaching under the guise of “parental rights” while simultaneously ruling for the 10 Commandments and the erasure of Black history in schools. The opposition created - strategically, over decades - a movement of indoctrination and mis/disinformatjon that is systematically breaking down federal regulation and agencies that enforce our laws and codes, and have selected bought-and-paid-for judges and justices to advance an agenda that puts money in the pockets of oligarchs and corporations while forcing a conservative social code on the population to keep citizens poor, unhealthy, fearful, and quiet. Transgender youth and adults are merely their next target. Seniors, disabled, veterans — all are already in the chopping back, because these people believe they are expendable now for the greater good of creating an entrenched white supremacist, nationalist government and society.
Rep. McBride was not elected to represent transgender people; she was elected to represent a district in Delaware made up of a range of people. It was impolitic of her to succumb to Ezra Klein's siren call, urging her to go out on a limb speaking for all transgender people and diagnosing the failings of "the transgender movement." I agree with you, Erin, that she should be a more vigorous advocate when she is asked to explain or defend herself as a trans woman (thus demonstrating more empathy for the larger transgender experience), because this task demands her stepping outside her elected role. Parsing the difference between her status as an elected official and her position as a transgender person would help her better serve both her constituencies. She is in a difficult position; I hope she will learn from this and grow stronger.
In a sense, Rep. McBride is advocating good advice for another era. Ten years or so ago - before the current backlash started, maybe this approach would have worked. In a sense, a compromise position already did exist before then, in the sense that post-op trans people would be the only ones to get “full” rights, in the sense that this surgery was required for passport changes, and therefore for full legal recognition.
But Rep. McBride’s advised approach is, I fear, too little too late these days. The reason is that the current backlash/anti-trans movement is way too energized, too all-consuming, too intent on destruction for a soft conciliatory approach to be viable anymore. Lives are at stake. It is not for nothing that the U.S. has been placed on a genocide watch list by a European human rights group. This doesn’t happen in a vacuum. It happens when there are serious problems. Five years ago, not a single GAC ban existed in any state. Now there are bans in 26 states, and all have just been greenlit by the Supreme Court. Again this is a serious situation. The anti-trans forces will stop at nothing, and there is no human right they want to yield to trans people. That is why caving to them won’t work anymore. This isn’t 2015 anymore.
I don't agree with the idea that only "some transgender people get full rights" at all. For years now the UK had full rights for self id and lost it because their government cave into bigoted bullies. Sandra, I don't view that as acceptable compromise at all.
I am not saying it was (or is) an acceptable or good compromise. I’m just pointing out that it existed for many years and seemingly kept the truce lines intact, until right wing forces decided to push for more.
So what are you proposing, that we gather the massive trans army that will outnumber the opposition and finally put them in their rightful place (dustbin) in history? No, of course not, because it's not realistic. That's why-- McBride is 100% correct. MLK had it right; there truly needs to be activism at the roots, but the leaders of a civil rights movement must be calm, measured, understand nuance, and communicate effectively, with a deep moral sense about what justice really looks like -- in public. That is, justice-- is what love looks like in public (James Baldwin). That justice takes the form of -- enforceable laws.
Seth, your description of MLK is not historically correct. It is the sanitized, sanctified image that is promoted by the right and center. In reality, at the time of his assassination, MLK was become more radicalized in his approach He had broadened his agenda to include opposing the Vietnam War and calling for economic equity--dangerous ideas. In fact, at the times of their assassinations, some historians consider MLK and Malcolm X (who also was evolving in his views at the time of his death) to have been not too far apart from one another.
You refuted your own refutation, partially. The only thing I'll correct you on is on chronology of events. MLK's young life and activism for the working poor was rooted in his study of the practices of Mahatma Gandhi (among others) and peaceful protest. That was the essence and foundation of his work in the 1950's and early 60's until the 1965 Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts. His radicalism came after those successful movements, and of course, his amped up approach, speech and knowledge of the fact that he was very clearly on the government's hit list, led to his predictable demise. Takeaway: his success in effecting change (getting laws passed) came through his early, peaceful protest movements that drew out the evil and irrational violence TOWARD the effected groups, highlighting WHO was in the wrong. Illustrating who is in the wrong to effect change, is the work at hand. McBride expressed that perfectly in her interview.
Damn. I wish I'd read your comment before I posted mine, Sandra; mine might have been different. I love the way you parsed out the historical development, and especially the urgency (e.g., genocide watch).
While I agree with you that this isn't 2015 anymore, neither is it 2019. Figuratively speaking, this is sort of a re-do of 1995. Back then nobody knew who we were, and they often assumed we were freaks and sexual predators. Now, with this re-do in 2025, the GOP and religious right have plainly painted us as freaks and sexual predators with their propaganda bullhorns. We are now at a branch point in 1995, in which instead of patiently educating people as to who we are, we are being forced down a path in which people are loudly being told lies about who we are.
I think that just like in 1995, our only way out is through education and outreach, but it's difficult to hear the truth about us over the din of the transphobic bullhorns. Perhaps we can no longer be heard, but we can be seen. I mean, I'll tell you this: Few things have gotten the attention and sympathy of my MAGA neighbors and family members than my packing my bags and moving to Europe. My community no longer has a webmaster or even an informational website. No longer do they have a friendly, helpful person down the road who can help them with technical sorts of things. No longer do they have that kind lady who looks out after the elderly and helps the community with disaster preparedness. No longer do they have that "critter person" who will come and free black rat snakes from their glue traps or take care of an abandoned and starving pet. My departure left a big, fucking hole in the community, and I would hope that people talk about it a little bit.
I think we need to highlight our impact stories. We need to talk about the growing American transgender and larger LGBTQ diaspora. We need to talk more about the domestic displacement of entire families with trans kids from red states to blue states. And as awful as it sounds, we need to speak very loudly and consistently about our George Floyds and Michael Browns, elevating them to the national spotlight.
Above all, we need to remember this: Very few people approve of the government telling people what they can and cannot do - telling us how we can and cannot live our lives, at least as adults. Of course the far-right has capitalized on the sentiment that children must be told what they can and cannot do. However, we need to turn that around to emphasize that ADULTS are now being told how they must parent their children, and they are being prevented from providing for them the life-sparing medical care that they need - so it becomes necessary to move the entire family to someplace where the government is not so overbearing.
Above all, we have to remember that our voice is tiny. We all have to get on the same page with the same simple, salient, high-traction message (like "I can't breathe"), and we need to keep repeating it until people start hearing us over the bullhorns.
Just my 2c, as an old activist who has been around the block a few times.
Sarah - All good points and I agree - especially that the right wing has controlled the narrative since 2019 and the left has largely ceded that narrative to them.
I’d make two other points: 1) Wrt the transgender diaspora, as things worsen in the U.S., trans people desperately need safe and reliable information about where to go, and safe countries really need to start offering asylum - soon. I hope that happens. 2) I feel sorry for families that undertook the pain and cost of moving from red to blue states to protect access to GAC for their family - only to see that care ripped away in some cases by hospitals in blue states caving to right-wing pressure, despite protective laws on the books. AGs in those states need to make sure this stops. State laws are really the last bulwark of protection left. Everything else seems to be collapsing or regressing.
Seems Sarah has become poisoned by fame and money. She's just another typical politician bending the knee for her own selfish endeavors. It's a sad day for us.
Thank you Erin! Fantastic piece as is typical of your work. I don’t understand how Democrats could possibly be going too far on trans rights when so many have been tepid at best in their support. There were zero mentions of trans people from the stage of the Democratic National Convention in prime time despite the GOP spending significant time from their convention stage attacking us. There was hardly any push back to over 200 Million in anti-trans political ad spend. McBride’s strategy is insanity, doing the same thing as what got Democrats steamrolled in 2024, but expecting a different result. There is clearly a better way forward. A Governor like Illinois’s JB Pritzker has galvanized popularity by being for all human rights (trans, LGBTQIA+, BIPOC, etc.). Illinois had a Republican Governor as recently as 2019 and Illinois going with a GOP Governor seems absurd today thanks mainly to his strong leadership.
Indeed, Pritzker is brilliant. Focusing on bodily autonomy and human rights is always a win. The detailed battles are always saved for post-election.
And yet, think about it: Do you really think that rank and file Democrats truly understand the intersex or trans experience (those two groups most often access trans-related healthcare) or more importantly, the SCIENCE behind it all? My guess is a solid "no." In fact, my lived experience these past couple of years has led (forced?) me to learn that it's quite possible that most in those two related groups understand very little about the other, much less about both. My point is, when times get tough for a constituency, how does a politician double down on support when they themselves adopted the issue as a politically expedient move, but can't really speak intelligently and in any depth on the matter? Let's face it, it's a pretty complex science and therefore, issue.
You can't. And don't. And then you just fade in to the woodwork, stop advocating/speaking for a constituency when it's no longer politically expedient to do so. And whether any of them remain committed enough to buckle down and learn? That will only come with calm, rational and thoughtful politicians --like the rare McBride is all those things AND trans-- who can and is capable of explaining the SCIENCE to those who truly care.
In her defense, look at who is interviewing her. Ezra Klein is the wretched master of making all kinds of horrible concessions sound like great (and brand new!) utterly reasonable ideas.
I can remember long ago (well, for some people anyway 😏 - late 1990s?) when Klein seemed like a principled progressive voice. But in recent years he has been exactly as you describe.
This is a really bad take. She is saying what a bunch of us are thinking. There are hills we are dying on that frankly never should have been fought on. It's this whack thinking that if you don't agree on EVERY single thing your transphobic or not an ally. It's what makes us lose more and more allies in a daily basis. This comment will prove my point. Just watch how much I'll get attacked for having a different opinion as a trans person.
Sarah, you’ve shared your disagreement and implied that people are not open to differing opinions and then essentially preemptively attack people who will do exactly what you felt you had the right to do, I.e., disagree.
I do disagree with you. We’re “losing allies” because of the right wing propaganda ecosystem that has been incredibly effective at controlling the narrative. Would you say the same about abortion rights (we went too far and if we hadn’t we’d still have abortion rights protected across the country). They have been the ones pushing the issue of trans rights, while dems avoided it.
What hill should we not be dying on? Trans kids in sports? Bathroom use? GAC for adults and kids based on science, medical professionals, patients and parents? Legal protections? Accurate documents? Being able to be safe?
Bigots think your very existence is you asking for too much. So, I don’t think it really matters if we wave the white flag on some aspects of human rights and dignity, they still want to shoot us. I think the fight for human rights is not about asking for too much, but about recognizing that people with power and privilege are not going to just back down, especially if they see weakness. So, if you want Everest, you need to take on all the hills or you may as well stay at the bottom.
Why would I say what hills I'm talking about? All that would do is get me dog-piled on in this echo chamber? Understand I try to pick my battles I think are worth fighting instead of every battle. I've given testimony in front of house sub committees, spoken on Q and A panels with doctors, parents of trans kids, and politicians. I run the largest active subreddit for transgender veterans. I do my part to help protect our rights, but then I see the fights that don't need to be fought that just alienate people.
Sarah you seem to be painting yourself as a victim. It sounds like you’ve done some important work. You can do great things AND people can also disagree with you, especially in a forum where people are scared and hurting. I worry that you’re so worried about alienating those you’re trying to persuade, that you’re alienating your friends. Dems have been so concerned about being civil, following arcane rules and procedures, reaching across the isle and not feeding narratives about themselves that they can’t control, that they’ve thrown their own under the bus, are seen as weak and not really committed to the principles they say they are and wind up actually making things worse. The GOP doesn’t care and are not worried about alienating anyone. In fact they revel in the cruelty. Picking battles only works if you have a willing partner in negotiating. But hatred and bigotry are a zero sum game. So, when you bring an olive branch to a gun fight with Nazis who are set on your annihilation, what do you think is going to happen?
I'm definitely no victim, but I also know that in my position I have to be careful about what I say due to cancel culture like this. I can't help the people I WANT to help if I'm cancelled by giving my opinion on things that have no impact on what I'm trying to do.
What’s the difference between “cancel culture” and free speech? I reject the whole cancel culture concept as a right wing narrative to tell people that they can’t exercise their right to speak and disagree and choose who they associate with or where they spend their money. It goes in only one direction. Somehow what is being done to immigrants, trans folx, protestors, books, education, DEI, “blue” cities and states is not framed as “cancel culture” is it? In fact, it’s actual cancel culture at the governmental level (not the level of the people and democracy), which is fascism. That’s what we should be concerned about.
While you’re choosing what battles are worth fighting and hill to die on, people are actually suffering and dying. I believe that fascism is absolute and doesn’t care about nuance or incrementalism. But there is also room for different approaches and we don’t all have to agree and I can vehemently disagree with you, but it doesn’t stop you for addressing things the way you think you can on a mezzo level, while others do on micro and macro levels.
In other words, Sarah, some people may agree with you and others may not. It’s a big tent and no movement is a monolith. Go do your good work and those who disagree with you will do theirs. But don’t dismiss or denigrate the objections people have to your opinions and approach as inferior or “cancel culture”. It’s disrespectful, misguided and not accurate.
I call it like I see it. If my opinion on a subject is unpopular and then then my entire helping of trans people gets cancelled because I differ from group think, that's cancel culture. And yeah I know people are suffering and dying. I've done a lot in my 39 years including deploying to a combat zone 4 times so I'm pretty familiar with death and suffering unfortunately. I'm also entitled to my opinion that I think others are wrong from how they are treating Sarah so don't denigrate my opinion.
I appreciate the differing reponses in this thread. Politics is often about stragedy more than it is what is right and good. The reality in my opinion is that we have a very uneducated populace, and trans rights (as in human rights) has become a major flashpoint in this culture war.
I have been eduating and training for nearly 40 years on providing good clinical (medical/therapeutic) care for trans people. Some of the kids who we supported to go on blockers are in their mid-30s now. None of these treatments are new. They are lifesaving.
When I wrote a book in 2004 saying that trans people were not mentally ill for being trans (and that gender identity should be removed from the DSM) nearly everyone thought I was nuts, including most LGB folk. Getting my colleagues to understand this has taken decades. I still get hired to do trainings where social workers and physicians are "blown away." They just didn't "get it," they say when I explain trans 101 (gender and sex are not the same thing for example). Getting the average American (especially in this climate) to get it, will sadly take longer.
This may not have been the best time to tackle the Supreme Court.
I don't think Sarah is a coward. I think she is brave, knowing that she is risking the anger of her own community for speaking up and saying we have to carefully pick our battles and tactics now.
We can be a community of many voices and strategies ... many paths to civil rights and equality.
Thank you, Erin. I only got a few minutes into that interview, and I couldn't take any more. It just felt wrong, wrong, wrong out of the gate. Let's talk about what our community did wrong, as opposed to the forces of unabashed hatred in the world making our lives harder.
I appreciate your perspective and agree with it. Progress came to the LGB because our unapologetically authentic transcestors’ unwavering convictions demanded it. Ms. McBride is not bridging the gap or educating anyone. Quite the opposite. Her internalized transphobia, and complete lack of awareness of it, is super harmful given the leadership position she holds.
Sorry Rep. McBride. I don't consider my right to exist to be something to debate. I used to admire you, so WHY have you become such a damned pick-me?? If you're not willing to fight for your own rights as a human being, then make way for someone who will.
The term pick-me seems to have been become a much overuse term that is often applied to people where it is not warranted. Look up the definition and tell me how it applies to Representative McBride.
Better yet, tell me why it DOESN'T apply to Representative McBride?
Because what I see is some saying "it's okay if they take away some of our rights, it's for our own good, honest, we tried too hard too fast". When the people she's trying to compromise with want us *not to exist*
I’m not a huge Sarah McBride fan, but this is a poor take on her. She is the only trans woman in this institution. If she wants to be taken seriously, if she ever is going to be able to be in a position to make real change, she has to ensure she is more than just the token trans person who only talks about transgender issues.
I agree. I’m disappointed that she is not fighting harder for trans rights. I contributed to get her elected even though she doesn’t rep my state because I thought she would be a strong and effective voice for trans folx. Money wasted.
Literally the same line I copied and was gonna paste 😂
And I couldn't agree more. Even knowing what was at stake, I almost didn't vote. It gave me what I felt was insight into why people don't vote or vote 3rd party. The 2 party political system in this country is broken. I'm sick of choosing between bad and worse
If only the Dems would move left instead of right they would pick up a whole new voter base. But they refuse. This is why our Overton window is so fucked. I'm sick of all this namby-pamby BS from the Dems. Stand up and fight. And while your at it quit letting people in their 70s and 80s make policy.
I think what many of us have realized is that most of the current Democrats have very little interest in fighting for anything besides what gets them donor money. I think of it this way-- the biggest difference between the 2 parties is one will actively attack others and try to make their lives worse, while the other isn't into directly hurting others, and will usually speak up against it, but can't be bothered to do much real action to advance protections. And I don't just mean on trans issues. We need new leadership.
How convenient for her to suggest we back off of the fight when she got where she is because of it
Once when I was being asked to serve on a board, I felt I was asked because I fit a certain demographic, gender, sexuality, race, etc., I was offended. My Bestie said to me ‘just because they want you as a ‘token’ doesn’t mean you have to act like one.’ She was right! I spoke up and questioned lots of activities, I wasn’t always polite, quiet women don’t make history. McBride seems to be quiet, acting like she is polite, maybe wanting to be a ‘token’?
Sad.
I don't think so. Did you listen to the entire interview with Klein?
I have now read Erin’s essay, over a hundred comments, then the full Klein interview, and finally Erin’s essay again. Erin’s essay certainly points out things in the interview that will be used by the very virulent right-wing anti-trans campaign. We are all up against a very powerful and hateful machine in most political areas, not only trans rights. They twist words all the time, they cite bogus “studies.” They rile up their constituents with the most absurd conspiracy narratives.
The comments here take Erin’s caveats and espouse an increasingly “pure” political agenda for trans rights, all the while increasingly vilifying Sarah McBride, until she is nearly being made out to be a MAGA, Project 25 ally.
We need to make a distinction between the dialog of activism and that of the working politician. Yes, we have our activists in Congress and, don’t get me wrong, they give a voice for all activists and play an important rôle in our political system, but there are also those (who are in VERY short supply these days) whose talents build bridges and who are able to accomplish change by riding a very fine line between warring factions. I believe Sarah McBride falls in the latter category. The MAGA forces have used the words of EVERYONE against us when they can, not only Sarah’s. As a groundbreaking icon she is a target of theirs. But let’s not also target her from this side of the debate. Really. Sarah McBride is not the enemy. Don’t let the MAGAs add fuel to our infighting. Rather, elect a second transgender person for Congress in 2026. In addition to hitting the streets.
Exactly. As I sit here watching one of the "keeper" movies in my collection, "42" (the story of Jackie Robinson), I'm reminded of what a strong illustration she used in that interview in its reference. Everyone in the community could stand to watch it-- again. https://youtu.be/HALfME0wjeU?si=lEwJfVkGbaU_ikOz
Excellent answer 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 while we are all on a slightly different page advocacy wise. Doing anything to promote trans rights. Whether leading from the front, advocating our politicians, educating people , one at a time. Or writing our stories , telling them on Substack or all the books about trans experiences, to just living your life. Our Resilience is our Resistance.
This is a disappointing review of Sarah McBride’s performance. Transgender rights have been slowly eroding for about eight years now and our strategies clearly aren’t working. My future as a transgender person is now hitched to a movement that sees any kind of nuance as betrayal and capitulation, which is absurd. Gay and lesbian people were able to win the Obergefell decision from a conservative court by following an organized strategy that strictly avoiding the flashpoint issues that transgender radicals embrace. Radicals prefer being righteous rather than being successful, and now a generation of trans youth will suffer as a result. It’s time for us to give up the victim mentality and take our position seriously, and Sarah McBride is showing us the way.
The reason transgender rights have been eroding for several years is mostly not because of anything trans people have done. It has mainly been the synergistic efforts and strong political wills of right wing think tanks, conservative billionaires, and Republican politicians to make it happen. It took several years and they worked hard at it, and they wanted it badly. This was largely a backlash inspired by (from their point of view) a defeat with Obergefell. In fact memos went out in the mid-2010s among conservative activists, stating that with gay marriage now off the table, they would start targeting trans people as the next move.
If trans activists have any “fault” here, it was not recognizing the risk of a serious backlash in the late 2010s and early 2020s, and not working harder and more proactively to counter it. Complacency hurt here.
Sandra, Well said, especially on the first part about there being a coordinated campaign to erode trans rights. I recoiled at the premise of this NYT interview/podcast because it blames the people suffering right now.
Trans youth having access to care IS a flashpoint issue.
But only because no one outside of the transgender community, and our trained care providers, actually know what it is, the science behind it, the risk/benefit analysis that has gone into the implementation of the Standards of Care. There is NO veracity to the claim that such care is experimental, or that it presents unreasonable risks of irreversible mistakes. That IS the result of the evidence based science that supports the Standards of Care. But that fact is ignored or falsely represented again and again. Scientific evidence, much like "rights", is not and ought not be subject to popular political opinion. That is, unfortunately, where we are (and very much where the New York Times intends to keep us.)
I agree 100% Ella, and you hit the operative word (and position) that trans people will have to make to "win back" the argument: I've long said that the road to acceptance of this aspect of the animal kingdom--is the SCIENCE. We were winning the argument when we focused on bringing the public along on the science, because IT'S THERE! Where we lost them? One example is post-pubescent males playing in girl's/women's sports. Another is/was the pronoun purity test. My sense of where things went off the rails is not long after the 2015 Obergefell ruling, granting marriage equality. It almost seems as though that seismic, historical moment gave the trans community a bigger sense of vindication/validation than was rooted in the reality on the ground?
Trying to be subtle with your transphobia, Seth? “Post-pubescent boys playing” girls’ sports? Let’s edit that, shall we, since you’re a fan of SCIENCE, to “the very small percentage of transgender girls in k-12 schools -many of whom are on puberty blockers and/or HRT-playing on teams that align with their gender.” Professional sports are also continuing to assess the short- and long-term effects of HRT etc., on individual adult athletes. We will all know more in time as will individual sports. I don’t even know what “pronoun purity” means. Just use a person’s preferred pronouns. There. Easy. Done. Obergefell was a nice win for gays and lesbians, some - some - of whom have, historically, also been transphobic and non-supportive of any rights beyond those that assist gays and lesbians. Your last comment merely reflects what Klein and McBride appear to be advocating for: capitulating to perceived public opinion or polls at any one moment in time for the perceived good of the Democratic Party which, I would say, is perceived by many of us on the ground as being vastly out of touch, too old, too white, and not principled enough. This is why, if you are paying attention, Bernie Sanders and AOC are so popular. The Democrats missed a Very Large Boat that was in their Sights since before Reagan and they did not respond with enough conviction and force. I’m 60 years old. I remember HIV/AIDS and all the gays should, too. Don’t make transgender people alone pay for decades of lassez-faire on the part of too-cautious Democrats and Independents.
Who are the “transgender radicals”? And what is so radical about insisting we have a right to exist and be treated with dignity and respect? I don’t see anyone out here asking for anything more. I just want to go to a public restroom without having a mob of people telling me where they think I belong, or worse, calling the police while I pee because their perception of my gender makes them think I am a predator. Is that radical? Is it radical to want your trans kid to have all the opportunities other kids have? What are the “transgender radicals” out here doing?
I disagree with your assessment of Sarah. She's becoming just another politician only interested in her self preservation, forgetting where she came from or who she is.
Thank you for saying this. There is nuance in the issues that are being discussed. But to address any of that nuance, is to be labeled as “conceding” the point.
Is it “nuance” that my daughter’s surgery was canceled a week before it was scheduled? Is it “nuance” that CHLA just shut down the entire Transyouth Clinic, leaving over 2000 patients without care?
I’ve been ignoring this interview. I met Sarah years ago when my trans child was only 4. I admire her, but don’t believe she can speak for trans people of represent all trans people. I just don’t care what public opinion is when it comes to my child accessing needed medical care. I care about the medical research and professional opinions of her medical and mental health professionals.
Laura, you’re engaging in “whataboutism” nothing in my comment or the original comment I responded to referred to anything about the recent decision in the supreme court.
There is nuance in transgender women playing in sports, there is nuance in medical care for transgender youth. Is that nuance as far as cancelling surgery? Definitely not. But there is no clear cut yes or no answer.
I’m saying this as a transgender woman who has served in the military for 12 years, 8 of those as an out and open transgender person. I’m on the same end your daughter is, I’m losing my job because of an arbitrary policy decision.
But, that doesn’t mean we can’t discuss these topics as a community. If we can’t reach an agreement or understanding among ourselves then others will continue to decide our fate for us.
There is no nuance about trans women in sports or about trans care for adolescents. They are non-issues turned into issues by the right to create a gateway into graver and graver limitations of trans rights. And to divide us. Which is succeeding.
Laura, I appreciate where you’re coming from, and I share your frustration with how the right weaponizes these topics to erode both mine and your daughter’s rights. You’re absolutely right that many of these issues, like trans women in sports or youth care are magnified to stoke fear and division.
That said, I think saying “there is no nuance” is oversimplifying things. Not because the opposition’s concerns are always valid, we know they aren’t, but because the public perception of these topics is complex. If we refuse to acknowledge that complexity, we risk sounding just as dogmatic as those trying to erase us.
I’m not saying we give ground on basic rights. But we should be able to talk, among ourselves, about difficult issues like how to protect young people while also respecting parental rights, or how to ensure fairness in sports while affirming trans inclusion. If we can’t do that in our own spaces, we leave a vacuum that bad actors are eager to fill.
I say this not to argue, but to appeal for strategic solidarity. We don’t need to agree on every policy detail but we can’t let others define the terms of this debate for us.
"I’m not saying we give ground on basic rights. "
Then be forthright and name what "not" basic right we should abandon.
Or, GFY!
"I say this not to argue, but to appeal for strategic solidarity."
They say as they claim we should throw someone under the bus.
Laura, you’re engaging in “whataboutism” nothing in my comment or the original comment I responded to referred to anything about the recent decision in the supreme court. "
Uhuh. Fuck you! What nuance? Spell it out! You haven't yet.
"There is nuance in transgender women playing in sports, there is nuance in medical care for transgender youth. Is that nuance as far as cancelling surgery? Definitely not. But there is no clear cut yes or no answer. "
Uhuh. The mistress of yes and no out one side of your mouth and then the other.
I just want to say I'm sorry. It hurts so much.
The majority of the readers here (certainly not all!) are younger, and didn't see the world that I saw in 1955 (when I had those inklings that nearly all trans people felt, and then denied due to the danger). We were making so much progress for people like your daughter. It will happen again, but not before a lot of pain.
https://www.bedazzledink.com/hannas-ascent.html#/
What nuance? Why has no one including Sarah and you been able to say?
I agree with you 100% Eve. As a 62 year old man (46,XY, AFAB, that is--intersex traits. I have accessed trans-related healthcare to address the lifetime of sex/gender incongruence), who's lived (not just heard about) the entire arc of life since DSM-III in 1973, when homosexuality was removed from the "list of mental disorders." I am impressed with McBride's maturity-- at 34 years old. Her wisdom is way beyond her years, and it's not "because of the efforts of the radical left" that she got where she is, but with that staid, mature, solid, balanced and calm approach. WWE cat fights or Jerry Springer reality-tv cosplaying are NOT strength, do NOTHING to advance the true cause, and she's right--no matter what, we'd be portrayed as the ones at fault. I don't think most on this comment string have, nor will even bother to listen to the entire Klein interview. If they were objective and committed warriors like many of us, they would.
The only thing I'd like to see her focus a bit more on, on the road to winning back the argument (which, let's face it, is likely a very long time away)? The SCIENCE, that is....we were winning when we had the science, rooted in sex development and the rights of all "God's children" at the forefront of the discussion for acceptance, NOT arguments about closely held beliefs, SPORTS, and certainly not arguing over purity tests about placing pronouns in a professional profile (which I would never do, and managed to escape the pressure sitting on various professional boards). I think that her perspectives are spot on-- about where we are now, and WHY. I could see it coming a hundred miles away as even support group Admin's were increasingly policing gendered language as early as 2017-18. The only place for me was to check out of such groups, which became ALL of them by 2022. Thank God for healing and getting finally to live life finally aligned in mind and body; something I never dreamed could even be possible as a bright, inquisitive but melancholy kid. Now...to face this backlash. Activism has its place, but the real work is done in properly communicating, and yes, bringing along public opinion because after all, it's public opinion that comes to bear on court opinions, and therefore...the law.
This is so beautiful, thank you for sharing all this with me, it’s good to connect. Yes, we need to reclaim the narrative, and not be dragged into debates that were already set up so that we could never win.
Science is a good one, we should be asking for more and better regulation of GAC for minors, not less. Personally, I want to see us focus on privacy and safety, rather than trying to get people to understand being transgender—we don’t need them to tell us their pronouns, just show basic human respect to all.
I don’t think it was trans activists or even so-called “transgender radicals” who were pushing people to share their pronouns. I think it was our allies trying to change the world to make it a safer place for us to just be. I have been working in trans advocacy spaces for well over a decade and putting pronouns in signature spaces was never a priority. It also wasn’t my experience that trans people initiated intros with pronouns. It was my experience and understanding that it was cisgender people so they wouldn’t make a mistake and feel bad about misgendering people like me whose gender expression is a bit ambiguous. I think this is a misconception - that it was our leaders and radicals in our community that pushed this narrative. Although it was well-intended by our allies, it led to those who were not as allied to feel like they had to make changes to accommodate us, which contributed to the backlash. I don’t think anyone is to blame though.
I do think that it is really divisive to vaguely label members of our community “transgender radicals” and then blame them for the backlash against our community. There is a real problem in our movement when we demonize and alienate each other, while giving credence and power to anti-trans narratives. Our moderate leaders, most of whom are not trans, did that with Biden’s compromise on trans children playing sports and the anti-trans movement ran with it. IMO, that capitulation basically opened the door wide open for this backlash to take hold.
That’s a really good point, and you’re right. The phrase transgender radicals falsely indicates that the radicals are transgender. That wasn’t what I was trying to say, but I did say it and you’re right to point it out and correct it.
I’m trying to describe people who advocate for transgender rights from a radical perspective, and it is definitely the case that the majority of those people are not transgender themselves. Perhaps a better term would’ve been pro-transgender radicals.
I am trying to divisive though. I want to create a division between the majority of transgender people and the radical voices who co-opt transgender issues as a token of victimhood to suit their desire to perform radicalism. They are good people, but deeply misguided, and should not speak for all of us.
I respectfully disagree. What has happened and is happening to trans rights
has nothing to do with progressive or radical within any population of people - immigrants, Blacks, workers, the poor, , LGBtQIA+, The tide was turning in favor of trans rights - as shown by court cases as recently as 2021 - and the tide turned after the horrendous decision to overturn Roe v Wade with the Dobbs decision. The theological and political extreme right wing together created a strategy to reverse decades of precedent and Constitutional law to next attack everything from books and teaching under the guise of “parental rights” while simultaneously ruling for the 10 Commandments and the erasure of Black history in schools. The opposition created - strategically, over decades - a movement of indoctrination and mis/disinformatjon that is systematically breaking down federal regulation and agencies that enforce our laws and codes, and have selected bought-and-paid-for judges and justices to advance an agenda that puts money in the pockets of oligarchs and corporations while forcing a conservative social code on the population to keep citizens poor, unhealthy, fearful, and quiet. Transgender youth and adults are merely their next target. Seniors, disabled, veterans — all are already in the chopping back, because these people believe they are expendable now for the greater good of creating an entrenched white supremacist, nationalist government and society.
Thank you 💖 I appreciate you being respectful, thanks for responding.
Rep. McBride was not elected to represent transgender people; she was elected to represent a district in Delaware made up of a range of people. It was impolitic of her to succumb to Ezra Klein's siren call, urging her to go out on a limb speaking for all transgender people and diagnosing the failings of "the transgender movement." I agree with you, Erin, that she should be a more vigorous advocate when she is asked to explain or defend herself as a trans woman (thus demonstrating more empathy for the larger transgender experience), because this task demands her stepping outside her elected role. Parsing the difference between her status as an elected official and her position as a transgender person would help her better serve both her constituencies. She is in a difficult position; I hope she will learn from this and grow stronger.
In a sense, Rep. McBride is advocating good advice for another era. Ten years or so ago - before the current backlash started, maybe this approach would have worked. In a sense, a compromise position already did exist before then, in the sense that post-op trans people would be the only ones to get “full” rights, in the sense that this surgery was required for passport changes, and therefore for full legal recognition.
But Rep. McBride’s advised approach is, I fear, too little too late these days. The reason is that the current backlash/anti-trans movement is way too energized, too all-consuming, too intent on destruction for a soft conciliatory approach to be viable anymore. Lives are at stake. It is not for nothing that the U.S. has been placed on a genocide watch list by a European human rights group. This doesn’t happen in a vacuum. It happens when there are serious problems. Five years ago, not a single GAC ban existed in any state. Now there are bans in 26 states, and all have just been greenlit by the Supreme Court. Again this is a serious situation. The anti-trans forces will stop at nothing, and there is no human right they want to yield to trans people. That is why caving to them won’t work anymore. This isn’t 2015 anymore.
I think you are exactly right, Sandra.
I don't agree with the idea that only "some transgender people get full rights" at all. For years now the UK had full rights for self id and lost it because their government cave into bigoted bullies. Sandra, I don't view that as acceptable compromise at all.
I am not saying it was (or is) an acceptable or good compromise. I’m just pointing out that it existed for many years and seemingly kept the truce lines intact, until right wing forces decided to push for more.
So what are you proposing, that we gather the massive trans army that will outnumber the opposition and finally put them in their rightful place (dustbin) in history? No, of course not, because it's not realistic. That's why-- McBride is 100% correct. MLK had it right; there truly needs to be activism at the roots, but the leaders of a civil rights movement must be calm, measured, understand nuance, and communicate effectively, with a deep moral sense about what justice really looks like -- in public. That is, justice-- is what love looks like in public (James Baldwin). That justice takes the form of -- enforceable laws.
Seth, your description of MLK is not historically correct. It is the sanitized, sanctified image that is promoted by the right and center. In reality, at the time of his assassination, MLK was become more radicalized in his approach He had broadened his agenda to include opposing the Vietnam War and calling for economic equity--dangerous ideas. In fact, at the times of their assassinations, some historians consider MLK and Malcolm X (who also was evolving in his views at the time of his death) to have been not too far apart from one another.
You refuted your own refutation, partially. The only thing I'll correct you on is on chronology of events. MLK's young life and activism for the working poor was rooted in his study of the practices of Mahatma Gandhi (among others) and peaceful protest. That was the essence and foundation of his work in the 1950's and early 60's until the 1965 Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts. His radicalism came after those successful movements, and of course, his amped up approach, speech and knowledge of the fact that he was very clearly on the government's hit list, led to his predictable demise. Takeaway: his success in effecting change (getting laws passed) came through his early, peaceful protest movements that drew out the evil and irrational violence TOWARD the effected groups, highlighting WHO was in the wrong. Illustrating who is in the wrong to effect change, is the work at hand. McBride expressed that perfectly in her interview.
Damn. I wish I'd read your comment before I posted mine, Sandra; mine might have been different. I love the way you parsed out the historical development, and especially the urgency (e.g., genocide watch).
While I agree with you that this isn't 2015 anymore, neither is it 2019. Figuratively speaking, this is sort of a re-do of 1995. Back then nobody knew who we were, and they often assumed we were freaks and sexual predators. Now, with this re-do in 2025, the GOP and religious right have plainly painted us as freaks and sexual predators with their propaganda bullhorns. We are now at a branch point in 1995, in which instead of patiently educating people as to who we are, we are being forced down a path in which people are loudly being told lies about who we are.
I think that just like in 1995, our only way out is through education and outreach, but it's difficult to hear the truth about us over the din of the transphobic bullhorns. Perhaps we can no longer be heard, but we can be seen. I mean, I'll tell you this: Few things have gotten the attention and sympathy of my MAGA neighbors and family members than my packing my bags and moving to Europe. My community no longer has a webmaster or even an informational website. No longer do they have a friendly, helpful person down the road who can help them with technical sorts of things. No longer do they have that kind lady who looks out after the elderly and helps the community with disaster preparedness. No longer do they have that "critter person" who will come and free black rat snakes from their glue traps or take care of an abandoned and starving pet. My departure left a big, fucking hole in the community, and I would hope that people talk about it a little bit.
I think we need to highlight our impact stories. We need to talk about the growing American transgender and larger LGBTQ diaspora. We need to talk more about the domestic displacement of entire families with trans kids from red states to blue states. And as awful as it sounds, we need to speak very loudly and consistently about our George Floyds and Michael Browns, elevating them to the national spotlight.
Above all, we need to remember this: Very few people approve of the government telling people what they can and cannot do - telling us how we can and cannot live our lives, at least as adults. Of course the far-right has capitalized on the sentiment that children must be told what they can and cannot do. However, we need to turn that around to emphasize that ADULTS are now being told how they must parent their children, and they are being prevented from providing for them the life-sparing medical care that they need - so it becomes necessary to move the entire family to someplace where the government is not so overbearing.
Above all, we have to remember that our voice is tiny. We all have to get on the same page with the same simple, salient, high-traction message (like "I can't breathe"), and we need to keep repeating it until people start hearing us over the bullhorns.
Just my 2c, as an old activist who has been around the block a few times.
Sarah - All good points and I agree - especially that the right wing has controlled the narrative since 2019 and the left has largely ceded that narrative to them.
I’d make two other points: 1) Wrt the transgender diaspora, as things worsen in the U.S., trans people desperately need safe and reliable information about where to go, and safe countries really need to start offering asylum - soon. I hope that happens. 2) I feel sorry for families that undertook the pain and cost of moving from red to blue states to protect access to GAC for their family - only to see that care ripped away in some cases by hospitals in blue states caving to right-wing pressure, despite protective laws on the books. AGs in those states need to make sure this stops. State laws are really the last bulwark of protection left. Everything else seems to be collapsing or regressing.
Also I nominate Erin in her stead
Gotta be hard for any politician to resist the siren call of so big a platform, 1000% good take she should have turned it down
Seems Sarah has become poisoned by fame and money. She's just another typical politician bending the knee for her own selfish endeavors. It's a sad day for us.
Thank you Erin! Fantastic piece as is typical of your work. I don’t understand how Democrats could possibly be going too far on trans rights when so many have been tepid at best in their support. There were zero mentions of trans people from the stage of the Democratic National Convention in prime time despite the GOP spending significant time from their convention stage attacking us. There was hardly any push back to over 200 Million in anti-trans political ad spend. McBride’s strategy is insanity, doing the same thing as what got Democrats steamrolled in 2024, but expecting a different result. There is clearly a better way forward. A Governor like Illinois’s JB Pritzker has galvanized popularity by being for all human rights (trans, LGBTQIA+, BIPOC, etc.). Illinois had a Republican Governor as recently as 2019 and Illinois going with a GOP Governor seems absurd today thanks mainly to his strong leadership.
Indeed, Pritzker is brilliant. Focusing on bodily autonomy and human rights is always a win. The detailed battles are always saved for post-election.
And yet, think about it: Do you really think that rank and file Democrats truly understand the intersex or trans experience (those two groups most often access trans-related healthcare) or more importantly, the SCIENCE behind it all? My guess is a solid "no." In fact, my lived experience these past couple of years has led (forced?) me to learn that it's quite possible that most in those two related groups understand very little about the other, much less about both. My point is, when times get tough for a constituency, how does a politician double down on support when they themselves adopted the issue as a politically expedient move, but can't really speak intelligently and in any depth on the matter? Let's face it, it's a pretty complex science and therefore, issue.
You can't. And don't. And then you just fade in to the woodwork, stop advocating/speaking for a constituency when it's no longer politically expedient to do so. And whether any of them remain committed enough to buckle down and learn? That will only come with calm, rational and thoughtful politicians --like the rare McBride is all those things AND trans-- who can and is capable of explaining the SCIENCE to those who truly care.
In her defense, look at who is interviewing her. Ezra Klein is the wretched master of making all kinds of horrible concessions sound like great (and brand new!) utterly reasonable ideas.
bs you don't take that interview then.
Agreed.
I can remember long ago (well, for some people anyway 😏 - late 1990s?) when Klein seemed like a principled progressive voice. But in recent years he has been exactly as you describe.
Well, I think she made it clear in the interview that she is a libertarian. So, she likely agrees with Klein.
Oh yuck.
If you think Ezra Klein selectively clip her interview, invite McBride to prove or even claim it.
I doubt that's the case at all, it's just the questions he asks and the way he frames things.
I see no distinction. McBride is free to say on being questioned that he got it wrong then. Has she?
This is a really bad take. She is saying what a bunch of us are thinking. There are hills we are dying on that frankly never should have been fought on. It's this whack thinking that if you don't agree on EVERY single thing your transphobic or not an ally. It's what makes us lose more and more allies in a daily basis. This comment will prove my point. Just watch how much I'll get attacked for having a different opinion as a trans person.
Sarah, you’ve shared your disagreement and implied that people are not open to differing opinions and then essentially preemptively attack people who will do exactly what you felt you had the right to do, I.e., disagree.
I do disagree with you. We’re “losing allies” because of the right wing propaganda ecosystem that has been incredibly effective at controlling the narrative. Would you say the same about abortion rights (we went too far and if we hadn’t we’d still have abortion rights protected across the country). They have been the ones pushing the issue of trans rights, while dems avoided it.
What hill should we not be dying on? Trans kids in sports? Bathroom use? GAC for adults and kids based on science, medical professionals, patients and parents? Legal protections? Accurate documents? Being able to be safe?
Bigots think your very existence is you asking for too much. So, I don’t think it really matters if we wave the white flag on some aspects of human rights and dignity, they still want to shoot us. I think the fight for human rights is not about asking for too much, but about recognizing that people with power and privilege are not going to just back down, especially if they see weakness. So, if you want Everest, you need to take on all the hills or you may as well stay at the bottom.
Why would I say what hills I'm talking about? All that would do is get me dog-piled on in this echo chamber? Understand I try to pick my battles I think are worth fighting instead of every battle. I've given testimony in front of house sub committees, spoken on Q and A panels with doctors, parents of trans kids, and politicians. I run the largest active subreddit for transgender veterans. I do my part to help protect our rights, but then I see the fights that don't need to be fought that just alienate people.
Sarah you seem to be painting yourself as a victim. It sounds like you’ve done some important work. You can do great things AND people can also disagree with you, especially in a forum where people are scared and hurting. I worry that you’re so worried about alienating those you’re trying to persuade, that you’re alienating your friends. Dems have been so concerned about being civil, following arcane rules and procedures, reaching across the isle and not feeding narratives about themselves that they can’t control, that they’ve thrown their own under the bus, are seen as weak and not really committed to the principles they say they are and wind up actually making things worse. The GOP doesn’t care and are not worried about alienating anyone. In fact they revel in the cruelty. Picking battles only works if you have a willing partner in negotiating. But hatred and bigotry are a zero sum game. So, when you bring an olive branch to a gun fight with Nazis who are set on your annihilation, what do you think is going to happen?
I'm definitely no victim, but I also know that in my position I have to be careful about what I say due to cancel culture like this. I can't help the people I WANT to help if I'm cancelled by giving my opinion on things that have no impact on what I'm trying to do.
What’s the difference between “cancel culture” and free speech? I reject the whole cancel culture concept as a right wing narrative to tell people that they can’t exercise their right to speak and disagree and choose who they associate with or where they spend their money. It goes in only one direction. Somehow what is being done to immigrants, trans folx, protestors, books, education, DEI, “blue” cities and states is not framed as “cancel culture” is it? In fact, it’s actual cancel culture at the governmental level (not the level of the people and democracy), which is fascism. That’s what we should be concerned about.
While you’re choosing what battles are worth fighting and hill to die on, people are actually suffering and dying. I believe that fascism is absolute and doesn’t care about nuance or incrementalism. But there is also room for different approaches and we don’t all have to agree and I can vehemently disagree with you, but it doesn’t stop you for addressing things the way you think you can on a mezzo level, while others do on micro and macro levels.
In other words, Sarah, some people may agree with you and others may not. It’s a big tent and no movement is a monolith. Go do your good work and those who disagree with you will do theirs. But don’t dismiss or denigrate the objections people have to your opinions and approach as inferior or “cancel culture”. It’s disrespectful, misguided and not accurate.
I call it like I see it. If my opinion on a subject is unpopular and then then my entire helping of trans people gets cancelled because I differ from group think, that's cancel culture. And yeah I know people are suffering and dying. I've done a lot in my 39 years including deploying to a combat zone 4 times so I'm pretty familiar with death and suffering unfortunately. I'm also entitled to my opinion that I think others are wrong from how they are treating Sarah so don't denigrate my opinion.
While you’re choosing what battles are worth fighting and hill to die on, people are actually suffering and dying.
This!!!
Your victim mentality is exhausting. People disagreeing with your bad opinions isn't a punishment for being trans wrong.
Was that meant to be sarcasm? That's not an attack I'm not sure if it was or not.
She is saying what no sane one of us is thinking.
"I say this not to argue, but to appeal for strategic solidarity. "
Then name them. Name the nuances, be specific and thereby potentially helpful, or please be silent . . . as it is, here she is only helping them.
I appreciate the differing reponses in this thread. Politics is often about stragedy more than it is what is right and good. The reality in my opinion is that we have a very uneducated populace, and trans rights (as in human rights) has become a major flashpoint in this culture war.
I have been eduating and training for nearly 40 years on providing good clinical (medical/therapeutic) care for trans people. Some of the kids who we supported to go on blockers are in their mid-30s now. None of these treatments are new. They are lifesaving.
When I wrote a book in 2004 saying that trans people were not mentally ill for being trans (and that gender identity should be removed from the DSM) nearly everyone thought I was nuts, including most LGB folk. Getting my colleagues to understand this has taken decades. I still get hired to do trainings where social workers and physicians are "blown away." They just didn't "get it," they say when I explain trans 101 (gender and sex are not the same thing for example). Getting the average American (especially in this climate) to get it, will sadly take longer.
This may not have been the best time to tackle the Supreme Court.
I don't think Sarah is a coward. I think she is brave, knowing that she is risking the anger of her own community for speaking up and saying we have to carefully pick our battles and tactics now.
We can be a community of many voices and strategies ... many paths to civil rights and equality.
Thank you, Erin. I only got a few minutes into that interview, and I couldn't take any more. It just felt wrong, wrong, wrong out of the gate. Let's talk about what our community did wrong, as opposed to the forces of unabashed hatred in the world making our lives harder.
I appreciate your perspective and agree with it. Progress came to the LGB because our unapologetically authentic transcestors’ unwavering convictions demanded it. Ms. McBride is not bridging the gap or educating anyone. Quite the opposite. Her internalized transphobia, and complete lack of awareness of it, is super harmful given the leadership position she holds.
Sorry Rep. McBride. I don't consider my right to exist to be something to debate. I used to admire you, so WHY have you become such a damned pick-me?? If you're not willing to fight for your own rights as a human being, then make way for someone who will.
The term pick-me seems to have been become a much overuse term that is often applied to people where it is not warranted. Look up the definition and tell me how it applies to Representative McBride.
Better yet, tell me why it DOESN'T apply to Representative McBride?
Because what I see is some saying "it's okay if they take away some of our rights, it's for our own good, honest, we tried too hard too fast". When the people she's trying to compromise with want us *not to exist*
You can edit posts. Just say'n.
I looked for it. I didn't see it
three dots in the upper right of your post
Thank you
How did I miss that 🤔
I’m not a huge Sarah McBride fan, but this is a poor take on her. She is the only trans woman in this institution. If she wants to be taken seriously, if she ever is going to be able to be in a position to make real change, she has to ensure she is more than just the token trans person who only talks about transgender issues.
Taken seriously by who? I see no reason to take her seriously.
I agree. I’m disappointed that she is not fighting harder for trans rights. I contributed to get her elected even though she doesn’t rep my state because I thought she would be a strong and effective voice for trans folx. Money wasted.
"Money wasted."
So far it was.
I too sent her money. Ashamed I did it.
"capitulation has never yielded progress on LGBTQ+ rights" or anyone's rights.
Giving in has never worked.
The reason they lost the election was they didn't take a stand in opposition to anything so many people didn't bother to vote.
Literally the same line I copied and was gonna paste 😂
And I couldn't agree more. Even knowing what was at stake, I almost didn't vote. It gave me what I felt was insight into why people don't vote or vote 3rd party. The 2 party political system in this country is broken. I'm sick of choosing between bad and worse
Well, that snaps.
I love when serious people talk about serious things. Amazing as always, Erin.
If only the Dems would move left instead of right they would pick up a whole new voter base. But they refuse. This is why our Overton window is so fucked. I'm sick of all this namby-pamby BS from the Dems. Stand up and fight. And while your at it quit letting people in their 70s and 80s make policy.
I think what many of us have realized is that most of the current Democrats have very little interest in fighting for anything besides what gets them donor money. I think of it this way-- the biggest difference between the 2 parties is one will actively attack others and try to make their lives worse, while the other isn't into directly hurting others, and will usually speak up against it, but can't be bothered to do much real action to advance protections. And I don't just mean on trans issues. We need new leadership.