At CPAC, Trans Issues Dominated. But Do Voters Care?
While inflammatory comments about "gender ideology" abounded at CPAC, the issue is hardly a top priority for Americans in general.

From the speeches at this year's Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), it would be easy to assume that transgender issues were the most pressing subject in American politics. In speech after speech, panel after panel, speakers hammered home the dangers of "gender ideology" and the importance of banning underage gender transitions and keeping school sports and bathrooms sex-segregated.
At CPAC, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R–Ga.) warned about a "billion-dollar industry that mutilates the genitals of children." Presidential candidate and former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley said that President Joe Biden was making soldiers take "gender pronoun classes." Conservative commentator Michael Knowles said, "Transgenderism must be eradicated from public life." While their comments seemed to rile up the audience at CPAC, how do such statements play with the broader Republican base—or the independent voters they'll need to sway in 2024?
Based on available polling data, not only do many self-identified Republicans and independents often have complex views on transgender issues, but it simply isn't a topic that ranks highly in Americans' political priorities.
According to a June 2022 poll from the Pew Research Center, Americans have surprisingly complex views on transgender issues, often supporting measures that protect transgender individuals from discrimination while expressing ambivalence in other areas. For example, almost two-thirds of respondents said they would support policies protecting transgender individuals from discrimination in "jobs, housing, and public spaces," but only 38 percent said that someone's gender can differ from their birth sex, a percentage that has actually been shrinking since 2017. Further, while there is still a clear partisan divide on transgender issues, nearly half of Republicans reported supporting anti-discrimination laws.
Republican respondents took consistently conservative positions on transgender issues, with large gaps between Republicans and Democrats on issues like youth medical transition and transgender athletes. However, there were still several responses that indicated a general ambivalence about some important elements of the current debate over gender identity.
For example, while 72 percent of Republican parents reported strong opposition to classroom instruction about gender identity in elementary school, this opposition cooled by 20 percentage points when parents were asked about middle- and high-school instruction. Most notably, many Republican parents didn't seem to care much, with 40 percent reporting that it was neither good nor bad that their child had, or had not, learned about gender identity in middle or high school.
Continuing this trend, Republicans seemed less invested in transgender issues than their Democratic counterparts. Sixty-eight percent of conservative Republicans and Republican-leaning independents reported not following trans-related bills closely, while only 54 percent of liberal Democrats and Democrat leaners did. Over three-quarters of self-described "liberal" or "moderate" Republicans didn't follow the issue closely.
Overall, it's doubtful that transgender issues are of top concern to a significant portion of Americans, though it's worth noting that specific polling is lacking. According to Gallup's Most Important Problem survey, only 1 percent of Americans listed "LGBT rights" as the political issue most important to them in February 2023. While the actual concern for the issue is probably a bit higher—framing the question as "LGBT rights" would likely suppress responses from those who oppose pro-trans policies—the survey provides a sense of scale. As it turns out, economic issues overwhelmingly dominate Americans' concerns. Poor government leadership, inflation, and the economy have topped the list since July 2022.
While inflammatory comments about gender identity may have gotten a warm reception at CPAC, opinion polling on the subject reveals a more complex picture. Republicans definitely swing more conservative on the subject than their Democratic counterparts, but they seem divided or uncertain about their stances on specific LGBT issues. And these issues are just not at the forefront of most Americans' minds.
If Republicans continue to make transgender issues the focus of their campaigns, they may run into trouble with attracting more moderate voters.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
At CPAC, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R–Ga.) warned about a "billion-dollar industry that mutilates the genitals of children."
The rightwing AOC is a lunatic, but she's right on this one.
Presidential candidate and former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley said that President Joe Biden was making soldiers take "gender pronoun classes."
True for the officer corps, don't know about enlisted.
Conservative commentator Michael Knowles said, "Transgenderism must be eradicated from public life."
Listening to his entire speech, he was referring to trans-radicalist ideology.
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I'm now creating over $35,000 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link--------------------------------------------->>> http://Www.JobsRevenue.Com
I never thought you were particularly hot, anyway.
no kidding.
❤️
Je suis payé plus de ????160$ USD à ????700 $ USD de l’heure pour travailler en ligne. J’ai entendu parler de ce travail il y a 3 mois et après avoir rejoint celui-ci, j’ai gagné facilement ????31 000 $ USD sans avoir de compétences de travail en ligne. Essayez-le simplement sur le site d’accompagnement…
COPIER ET OUVRIR CE SITE…► GOOGLE WORK
Listening to his entire speech, he was referring to trans-radicalist ideology.
Perhaps in context that's more clear, but I get a little tired of guys like him saying things like "Transgenderism must be eradicated from public life” knowing full well that the quote is going to be used out of context to make it sound like he's implying that transgender people must be eradicated from public life.
He should have said something more along the lines of "trans-radicalist ideology/ gender marxism must be eradicated from public life.” It's just a pet peeve of mine that these guys keep making the same mistake of saying stuff that they should know by now is just going to be taken out of context by some left-wing hack with an axe to grind.
To be fair, Knowles isn't the brightest mind on the right.
The full quote.
“For the good of society and especially for the good of the poor people who have fallen prey to this confusion, transgenderism must be eradicated from public life entirely, the whole preposterous ideology — at every level,” Knowles told the gathering in Maryland.
He literally says ideology.
Right, but of course no one on the left is going to use the full quote, they're just going to take the middle part, "transgenderism must be eradicated from public life entirely," and quote that in order to imply that Michael Knowles wants to send trannies to the gas chamber or some such horseshit.
Yeah. And they should be called out for their lies. I read Rolling Stone, Daily Beast and others were already forced to change their headlines due to threat of lawsuit.
Here is Knowles speaking after the speech.
“The idea that I or anybody else called for trans people to be eradicated is obviously a total lie,” Knowles said. “I choose my words, generally speaking, pretty carefully. I’m pretty precise in my language.”
.
“If you want to eradicate a medical condition, you’re not saying you want to eradicate the patients. I don’t see how they could get that,” he continued, claiming the editors likely understood what he meant but intentionally misled their audiences with the erroneous headlines.
.
“I think they were acting with actual malice to libel me,” Knowles said.
Fuck the left and their propaganda.
Truth hits nerves harder than fiction.
Send direct messages instead of worrying how they'll be manipulated.
Agreed. He did it to purposefully throw out a bomb, which would then allow him to claim that people were misquoting and misrepresenting what he said.
There is no doubt it was done on purpose. Even though I do agree with Unicorn on Knowles’ level of intelligence.
Wait wait wait. Are you saying that there is a deliberate strategy by some to make an inflammatory statement, and then when the angry reaction ensues, use the reaction to claim victimhood status?
Because I was told that whenever that happens to right-wingers on social media, it was because the tech companies were biased against conservatives, not because the conservatives in question were being inflammatory assholes.
Both sides employ bomb throwers. It's really the most common strategy nowadays.
You weren't told that.
Again. He literally says the ideology in the same quote. He even says transgenderism. Ie the belief behind it, not transgenders.
Democrats and activists will always twist words. Helps to look up what was actually said.
If someone said conservatism must die, do you equate it to all conservatives must die?
somebody around here was tweeting about a Conservative Red Wedding or something iirc
You do.
Technically Welch.
Yes, he was. That's why he can now turn around and claim people are taking his statement out of context. He purposefully phrased it to generate the response to set up his rebuttal.
He literally knows how the Dems and media will twist his words.
And to answer your question, no, but I know the response conservatives would bring to the party, which would then allow the person who said it to do as Knowles did.
You are implying intention through bald assertions to attack his motivation. You are doing the activists attacks for them while calling him a bomb thrower just above. Instead of calling the left out for misconstrued him you are attacking him for a clear and concise statement. It is strange.
You even invent more bald assertions to loop conservatives in to blame as well. Just a strange response.
No, you’re just getting angry at me because I’m not attacking Dems and rather calling out a Repub for what he did.
I am making a supported assertion based on my knowledge of Knowles and the concept of CPAC to begin with. I may be wrong and that he did it completely unknowingly in how it would be received on the left, but I don’t think Knowles that dumb.
And I did call out the left for their response, just apparently not strong enough for you.
No. I'm not. I'm pointing out your strange need to attack people that have no part in the miscinstructioj of his words. Despite posting his entire quote you got defensive and implemented a blind assertion instead of stating you never bothered to read the entire quote. It is a behavior sarc also has.
It is not a supported assertion. Knowles as talked about the issue for years as stated lower. You are apparently ignorant of that. Nothing he said at CPAC was new or novel from his prior statements. Your inference on his motivation was bald.
I am calling it strange how you had to impart two other people to call out when it is solely the left who misconstrued his words.
Youre free to admit you never investigated the outrage or read the actual entire quote. You'd save some face.
Dude. You have got to tone down your rhetoric.
I didn't get defensive. I simply explained a tactic that was used by Knowles. Of course I read the entire quote, heck even I watched his speech. And "impart two other people?" What does this even mean?
In the end, you have got to calm down in your responses. I don't play the your team bad, my team good game. I'm just calling it like I see it.
In the end, if your argument is that Knowles didn't know that when he said that he wants to eradicate transgenderism that the left would respond the way they did, then I don't know why you think Knowles so ignorant.
I will even expand it for you. His motivation is to end the encouragment of gender theory and the explosion of gender and trans ideology. He has discussed it for many years. He has interviewed doctors and detransitioners. His motive is clear and has been consistent. He isnt baiting anyone. He is sticking to his statements as said since 2015 or so. He even had a podcast yesterday regarding his statements. Nowhere does he say it was to bait the left.
And you even made a bald assertion about my motivations. Seems to be a common theme today for you.
The left on their own chose to misconstrue his statements. Full stop. And youre here helping them do it by trying to impart a motivation to his words.
Ugh. I'm not helping anyone do anything. I simply explained a strategy used by many in the media.
Yes, his motivation is to end transgenderism as a practiced theory in the US. And in doing that he employed a tactic to get the left to bite, and they did.
You literally said "he", not the media in general. Lol.
Yes, I was talking about his use of the bomb throwing tactic.
Please stop trying so hard for a "gotcha." It's really just sad.
"Abolish whiteness"
-leftist shibboleth
So you accept the argument of she was asking to be raped by wearing a short dress?
Perhaps in context that’s more clear, but I get a little tired of guys like him saying things like “Transgenderism must be eradicated from public life” knowing full well that the quote is going to be used out of context to make it sound like he’s implying that transgender people must be eradicated from public life.
Yes, he knew what the leftists would do with what he said. And yes, he knew that folks like you, ostensibly holding a position similar to his, would say about the uproar and how you'd take HIM to task for THEIR deliberate malfeasance.
And yet, what he said was correct. The concise way to say this-- “trans-radicalist ideology/ gender marxism" is 'transgenderism'.
We are not served by behaving as if their tactics are valid.
How about simply, "Nobody should feel compelled to participate in the sexual fantasies of the mentally ill," and "Nobody should feel compelled to participate in nor accept someone else's worldview?"
Kind of hard to misrepresent that.
"The rightwing AOC is a lunatic, but she’s right on this one."
She's right a lot.
I daresay Thomas Massie is the only congressman who consistently says as much that is right as she does.
You sure she's a lunatic?
Funny how media portrayals hold sway even when we don't realize it.
Um, yeah, she’s a lunatic. Maybe she says things you think are right, but she sure says a lot of crazy and deranged shit as well. And doesn't help that she does things like speak at a white supremacist conference.
I don't pay any attention to her. I'll assume the truth is somewhere between your statement and Nardz's.
That's a bad assumption, but you do you.
Were they actual white supremacists or people that the Democratic Party doesn't like so they smear them?
Because there's millions of the latter but barely any of the former.
She's been on shows and longform conversational podcasts. She's very much a Trump style Republican with strong conservative leanings and on some subjects a libertarian position.
Tbh, she comes across as a nice person who mostly holds reasonable positions. All that said, she certainly has inclinations I oppose and has taken positions libertarians should oppose. Overall, I'd say she is a net positive for liberty though she's inclined towards excesses in favor of conservative priorities
She is actually really good friends with Massie and has a lot of similar comments and policy choices as he does. But she says dumb things to.
Meanwhile she has done good things like forcing votes by objecting to voice votes from aides.
She is right a lot. Unfortunately it's mostly because she isn't bright enough to refrain from saying the quiet part out loud. Her heart is in the right place, but she isn't the sharpest tool in the shed.
Both characteristics would be optimal, but I'll take the first one over the second, assuming she isn't mentally handicapped.
Yes. I'm sure.
she is so right about so many things it's amazing actually
I love how the MAGA pariahs in congress are the only ones correct about the ukraine crisis. Fuck the libs.
Libertarians For Focusing On The Jewish Space Lasers Problem!
she's demented enough to support the continuation of social security so i see what you mean.
Circumcision is reprehensible but most clingers excuse it because slack-jaws tend to love superstition.
It's not actually that complex an issue. We don't want guys dressed up as women shaking their penis in the faces of children. The left just can't understand that simple fact. To them, sexual abusing children is normal and they can't understand why anyone would object. It shows just how sick and demented they are when it comes to children.
I am now making $19k or more every month from home by doing very simple and easy job online from home. I have received exactly $20845 last month from this home job. Join now this job and start making cash online by
Follow instruction on website Here………….>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
They really need to simply start filing criminal charges against the child sex abusers. Reason needs to add a "like" button to the forum, too...
Democrats should run on the Koch / Reason / Shackford position that transwomen (even if they still have beards) belong in all female-only spaces. Sports, bathrooms, locker rooms. Oh, and especially prisons! This will really highlight how extreme Republicans are.
Well, yeah. Democrats have their own problem with their voters being out-of-step with their politicians and leadership on this issue, and yet it's front and center at every Democrat event or speech, just as it was at CPAC.
Curious isn't it how we see the article highlighting one side (while clearly misrepresenting and intentionally misunderstanding their position) and ignoring the other.
The issue is that normal people have a problem with kids being groomed and intentionally confused. Of course the subject is more permissible with older students when discussed in a reasonable manner. Conservatives take issue with the propaganda and ridiculous cultural pushes of the left. The reason you hear so much about it is because it is the biggest thing the left has been hammering on lately and they have taken their advocacy to absurd and damaging levels. There are plenty of things we need to push back against, but the excesses of trans advocacy (and other lgbt and identity issies) is something that normal people oppose, including those on the left.
Especially when the left has been making hay out of child transgender mutilation for years now. The right responds, and suddenly everyone needs to shut up?
Like that kerfuffle over banning gas stoves. Nothing said when the Greenies suggest it, but it's culture war when everyone else says Hell No!
Sorry, Reason, you're lost in the swamp.
* Get out of DC
* Fire KMW
* Learn to speak of liberty first
Sorry, Reason, you’re lost in the swamp.
* Get out of DC
* Fire KMW
* Learn to speak of liberty first
Bingo. Reason needs to get back to basics.
According to whom?
Reason is doing what it's directed to do.
Why pretend otherwise?
Yes, the people with defensive knife wounds all over their arms are the ones that need to sit down and quit making hay out of all this inconsequential stuff.
This article is an excellent point of difference between a liberty-oriented publication like Spiked-Online, which has taken this issue head-the-fuck-on, while Reason just prints reams of DeSantis articles and "don't say gay".
They have a flag they literally fly over captured territory
It is psychological warfare. It is meant to demoralize and confuse.
I'm pretty sure this issue will go away once enough liberal parents see their daughters miss out on college athletic scholarships in softball, soccer and basketball because trans girls took their starting spots on the high school varsity team.
My bombastic prediction for 2023:
reason will defend qualified immunity as the lawsuits against individual teachers and school officials are starting to roll off the assembly line.
My bombastic prediction:
Penn State's offensive line will be all "trans". And they will get rid of woman's soccer, basketball and softball since title ix requirements will have been compiled.
Actually .... that would make a fantastic plot: all men identify as women, abandon the male leagues for the female leagues, drive the women out, and turn Title IX on its head.
Would suck for the actual females, though. Maybe they could identify as males and resurrect the male leagues.
Reason will characterize Rep efforts to eliminate QI as using big government to pursue the culture war.
Why would Reason do that? They have never supported qualified immunity before.
I think you overestimate leftist drones' ability and willingness to oppose The Party...
There are very few trans high school and college athletes. Lots of them lose to the non-trans kids anyway. It's a big nothing-burger statistically. That trans-woman swimmer who looked like a man was pretty much an outlier.
https://the74million.org/article/national-analysis-they-said-letting-transgender-girls-play-would-drive-athletes-away-from-hs-and-college-sports-it-didnt/
I don't think that swimmer should have competed, btw. She transitioned late and was really built like a man. Not sure how to regulate that out but all this focus on the right is not in line with how important most people feel this issue is (not that important).
LOL
"Don't believe your lying eyes!"
Amusing. Leftists believe it's so important everyone must talk about it all the time including with children. It's concurrently not very important.
Leftists love to minimize the harm their policies do to people. Only a FEW women/girls were deprived of meaningful participation in sports, so it's NBD. Those people were expendable for the cause.
*MOST* kids with gender dysphoria don't desist as adults, so they ones that do arw expendable for the cause, etc.
People's lives are only valuable insofar as they support the cause.
Republicans, increasingly uncompetitive in national elections because there just aren’t that many slack-jawed bigots left in America, should — must? — continue to hope to sink a three-cushion bank shot at the Electoral College.
The culture war is not quite over but it has been settled. Faux libertarian clingers hardest hit. Until replacement.
Do the voters care about child abuse & mutilation?
Yes.
And we've seen support of many of the laws outside of extreme leftist areas. Even the VA governor has good support. School board meetings are packed. So yes people care.
All those rabble rousers at the school board meetings aren't voters.
Not after the USSA gestapo gets through with them
Terrorists according to the DOJ.
Just ask Glenn Youngkin.
Yes. Because these issues ARE not just uncertain, but largely insignificant enough that they are easily handled on a case by case basis.
We don't need a federal bathroom policy. We need trans people to understand that you're not getting in the ladies room if you look like a guy.
If you want consideration, make an effort. If you make an effort, a sincere effort and you're just too manly to pass. You're too manly. The gods are telling you something. But, you'll be treated better than the person who thinks they can change gender on a whim.
There are personal pronouns and general pronouns. You have total control over the personal pronoun--because it's your name. You have NO control over general pronouns. They're general. People will call you what they perceive you as.
We don't need a federal Secretary of Pronouns.
You have total control over the personal pronoun–because it’s your name.
Your name isn't a pronoun of any type. It's a proper noun. And there's no such thing as a general pronoun.
Your name isn’t a pronoun of any type. It’s a proper noun.
What do you think 'pronoun' is a portmanteau of?
I'll give you a few seconds.
Well, this is embarrassing.
It’s not a portmanteau, “pro” is a Greek preposition, meaning “toward”. Literally a pronoun “points toward” a noun.
I'm not at all sure what kind of inconsistent thoughts are rattling around in that comment, but personal pronouns are nonsense. I have enough trouble remembering actual names; I am sure as hell not going to waste brain cells trying to remember whatever variable pronouns someone has chosen.
If anyone ever gets in my face about pronouns, I will point out that they don't know mine and have already mispronouned me several times, so fuck off.
I usually just tell them my pronouns are (Fuck off/Die).
That's uh, Czar of Pronouns now.
The commissar will be in contact with you shortly.
Well, your bank and credit card companies feel differently. Your accounts have been canceled. Here are checks for your balances, minus a few pronoun fees. Good luck!
Dem: Trans, trans.
Dem: No. Trans, trans, trans.
Dem: Trans!
Dem: Trans! TRANs, TRANS.
Rep: Trans?
Reason: Why are Reps obsessed with trans?
What ridiculous people you are.
FYI that was literally how this rolled out on that Wednesday in 2015 when "we" (the royal 'we') were accused of being "obsessed" with bathrooms.
The schadenfreudiest part, IMO, was how retardedly the shit hit the fan too.
His script needs an epilogue:
NCAA: Cancel all collegiate sports in NC! TRANS!
NBA: Boycott NC. TRANS!
NAACP: Fuck the black people in NC! We've got trannies to protect!
State of New York: Cancel all contracts with businesses HQed in NC.
Adidas, Paypal, Deutschebank: Cancel all expansion plans in NC.
...
...
Reason's take couldn't have been a more "What, me worry?" Mad-Magazine-style sketch where some goofball has answered the door and is only opening it enough to peak out and hide the fact that there's a grass-smoking monkey hanging from the chandelier, the wall paper is peeling, the kids are drunk, the kitchen's on fire, the dog has gnawed a leg off the coffee table, and there's water running down the staircase.
They're not people
They live!
*dons sunglasses*
For now
OK, Emma, let’s rip apart that survey.
38% say that one can be a different sex than observed at birth (no one assigns sex to a baby). This is a decrease from 44% five years ago. Three-fifths say that a sex does not change from that observed at birth.
These views differ even more sharply by partisanship. Democrats and those who lean to the Democratic Party are more than four times as likely as Republicans and Republican leaners to say that a person’s gender can be different from the sex they were assigned at birth (61% vs. 13%). Democrats are also much more likely than Republicans to say our society hasn’t gone far enough in accepting people who are transgender (59% vs. 10%). For their part, 66% of Republicans say society has gone too far in accepting people who are transgender.
A majority also believe that one should play on the sports team that is for one’s biological sex.
Roughly six-in-ten adults (58%) favor proposals that would require transgender athletes to compete on teams that match the sex they were assigned at birth (17% oppose this, 24% neither favor nor oppose).
Now, this is interesting.
Previously published findings from the survey show that 1.6% of U.S. adults are trans or nonbinary, and the share is higher among adults younger than 30.
1.6%. That’s a very tiny percentage. For comparison, Muslims make up 0.8%, Jews make up 1.4%, and Mormons make up 2% of the U.S. population. A bigger question is why the share is higher among adults under 30.
What’s interesting is that Republican/Republican-leaning uses science as a reason more often as to why a person’s sex cannot change. One might say that Democrats are influence by social media more often.
Republicans who say gender is determined by sex assigned at birth are more likely than Democrats with the same view to say their knowledge of science (52% vs. 40%) and their religious views (45% vs. 34%) have had at least a fair amount of influence, while Democrats are more likely than Republicans to say the news (17% vs. 10%), social media (16% vs. 10%) and knowing someone who is trans (15% vs. 9%) have influenced them – though the shares are still small among both groups.
A Democrat split.
But among Democrats, White adults are often less likely than other groups to favor such laws and policies, particularly compared with their Black and Hispanic counterparts.
"1.6%. That’s a very tiny percentage. For comparison, Muslims make up 0.8%, Jews make up 1.4%, and Mormons make up 2% of the U.S. population. A bigger question is why the share is higher among adults under 30."
I bet it's much, much, much, much lower than that if you go back 10 years.
I bet it’s not even half that in real life.
There’s no way they’re nearly half the size of the LGB community.
There’s no way they’re nearly half the size of the LGB community.
The 'T' community is included in the overall LGBT community. A good chunk of them are L,G or B as well as T. It's why they get so offended that lesbians don't want to have sex with T lesbians.
Good comment, but given you're addressing someone capable of using the phrase "assigned at birth" unironically, you're likely wasting your time on an idiot.
Parents care what teachers are telling their kids (especially if they are not telling the parents), and parents vote. And Democrats are vastly underestimating how many parents aren't woke.
I've often wondered what Melania looked like when she was a dude.
Probably not as manly as Michelle.
Here's how a libertarian publication covers this issue.
Ever since Duffield first tentatively raised her head above the parapet to suggest that the common noun for ‘individuals with a cervix’ is, in fact, ‘women’, she has been subjected to outright hostility and ostracism.
Well, I mean technically, "women" would be "individuals with cervixes".
cervii?
Cervices. As in, men frequently avail themselves of women’s cervices by coming up through the service entrance.
And technically, “cervix” means “neck”.
disorienting when both referenced in a set of medical records
Oh FFS. Do I have to pull out the 1912 Oxford Dictionary again to point out that in that dictionary, there were 10+ definitions for both the words "man" and "woman"?
The word "woman" CAN mean "individual with a cervix". It CAN ALSO mean "someone who conforms to the social conventions typically associated with the female sex". So it is entirely possible for a person to be a "woman" according to Definition #2, but not a "woman" according to Definition #1.
Where in the world did the idea ever emerge that there was one single solitary unitary definition for either the word "man" or "woman"?
In a place called Reality. You should visit sometime.
Okay, here we go again.
https://archive.org/details/con00ciseoxforddicfowlrich/page/1027/mode/1up?view=theater
Definition of woman:
"Adult human female."
ALSO:
"man with feminine characteristics"
It was like that even back in 1912.
ya for like 5000 years before 1912 chicks couldn't even take the stage ... all of this is costume, down to the expensive surgeries.
You don't understand what a dictionary is. I promise NO ONE in 1912 was confused about what a woman is.
I just quoted a fucking dictionary.
The word "woman" includes the definition of "man with feminine characteristics" even back in the very non-woke days of 1912.
And you obviously don't understand what a dictionary is.
Oh, and if voters aren't "obsessed" with Trans issues, why did Hershey's chocolate company pick a man to represent international Women's day? Who's obsessed with this issue, now?
Someone came up with an answer to that. Check out Jeremy's Chocolate Binary.
They have two bars available, SheHer and HeHis. They state that one of them has nuts, and the other doesn't. If you have to ask which one has nuts, keep giving your money to Hershey.
Jeremy's is $25 for 4 1.5-oz bars holy crap I don't need to virtue signal that badly.
Hershey’s marketing department, evidently. What does that have to do with voters.
Such a bitchy little sea lion. Only role here is to frustrate people with inanity to protect narratives of the left. What a sad little sea lion.
More libertarian coverage of the issue.
I was unaware that "libertarian" was now synonymous with "socially conservative".
You think that the people forcibly trying to change the language are libertarian?
Well he is trying to forcibly change the definition of libertarianism to leftism so yes.
Where is the use of force even suggested here?
There is bullying aspect of the trans activists.
my nephew/niece tells people his feelings are hurt when we don't call him her. even rags on 80 year-old grandma to get it right
Maybe it’s obnoxious, annoying, whiny, but it’s not forcing anyone.
Are you describing the nephew or yourself?
oh it is. attempted total control of the room.
Using social pressure, etc. Not using force.
That aspect is the entirety of it
So is bullying a violation of the NAP now?
So is pandering to a delusion a requirement of the NAP now?
The problem is that "libertarian" is quickly becoming synonymous with "Groomer's Rights". Everyone else already headed for the exits.
You have to wonder what that says about the people who still call themselves libertarians.
That sounds like Smith is a raging narcissist who takes offense because it makes Smith the center of attention.
It’s real “libertarian” to diss a celebrity?
But Do Voters Care?
1. It's not happening.
2. OK, it's happening, but it's not as bad as you think.
3. OK, it's happening, and it's as bad as you think, but it's a good thing.
4. It's happening, it's as bad as you think, and it's doing demonstrable harm, so let's just declare amnesty and/or pretend SCOTUS didn't make a ruling in Bostock v. Clayton and/or that half the Eastern Seaboard didn't refuse to do business with the state of NC before our overtly stupid and malicious decisions cause blowback and/or overshadow us. <- You are here.
>>the dangers of "gender ideology"
adorably perplexing you get paid for words yet care not what they mean
How to Conquer the USA and GROW the Nazi-Empire….
Build [WE] identity-affiliation gangs and ARM them with Gov-Guns.
That is what it’s all about. What it has always been all about.
Conquering the land of the free for a [Na]tional So[zi]alist – Empire.
Motive: *Legal* armed-gangs of criminals out exploiting and robbing the public.
Throwing away Individual Liberty and Justice for All for [WE] gang RULES! Gangland politics. Which-ever Gang has more GUNS wins the public enslavement camp.
Gender-affirming therapy is a valid medical procedure that the government should not ban. The decision to obtain this therapy should rest solely with the parents, in consultation with the child, and the doctors, therapists and counselors of their choice.
At most, the government should regulate this therapy, along with other similar procedures on minors, by perhaps requiring a waiting period, or requiring multiple consultations from multiple professionals, before proceeding with any irreversible medical procedures. It should not be banned because a ban represents government overreach and usurpation of the liberty of parents to decide what is best for their child's health care.
THAT is the libertarian position on the matter. Not some social conservative culture war nonsense.
One thing is for sure; It's not a Union of States issue. That said; Exactly where does one get off believing that knifing their children for fun is "what is best"? There's a vast difference between saving their life by surgery and just doing it for fun.
No one is "doing it for fun".
nobody is doing it to change biology either.
Nor for any legitimate medical reason.
Suicide rates don't even decrease post surgery. But it leaves a lifetime of pain for those who detransition. Where detransition rates are climbing quickly. The lawsuits against hospitals and doctors are legitimate.
Do they count detransitioners in those stats?
They damn well should I include those suicides...
Most studies that are positive if gender affirming care use short time periods to hide long term effects. One stopped monitoring after just 3 months. And no, if someone drops out of being trans they are removed from follow up.
"Gender-affirming therapy is a valid medical procedure"
What disease condition does it treat or cure?
Gender dysphoria, is my understanding. What is your point?
Participating in a delusion does not cure it.
I'm waiting for Jeff to advocate forcing us to see the people schizophrenic people see.
Withholding food from anorexics is also not a treatment or cure, jeff.
Show me a doctor who believes that withholding food from an anorexic is a valid medical procedure.
Trannyism is, literally, no different whatsoever. There's just considerably more money in saddling somebody with medical debts for life at the earliest age possible.
A made up “disease”. Anyone with any awareness of how psychology and psychiatry “diagnose” people with unscientific and unproven “disorders” (none of the disorders in the DSM are backed up by scientific research - they were made up). The “diagnoses” were made up by a group of psychiatrists. If you look up how the DSM was made you will see I’m telling the truth. Dr. James Davies has a great lecture on it
Psychiatry itself is of questionable scientific legitimacy.
Is it? What is the proof it is effective treatment? It does not seem to really solve the psychological distress people diagnosed as trans are suffering from, nor does there seem to be much rigor in making such a diagnosis. Furthermore, it seems to be anathema to talk about what is going on psychologically since the trans movement has now taken on a bizarre aspect of religious zealotry completely unable to debate the subject except as revealed dogma which cannot be contradicted despite the many instances of cognitive dissonance in the ideology.
Also, a large part of the argument is that parents should not be involved in these decisions for minors, at least not the ones who would be skeptical of transitioning. Then there is the fact that transitioning stops normal, healthy development into adulthood and permantly removes and alters healthy organs into nonfunctional facsimiles of the sexual characteristics of the opposite sex. A minor cannot reasonably be said to be able to give informed consent to these chemical and surgical procedures and completely understand what they are giving up permanently. Also, once this is done, they are on permanent medical maintenance to retain the false sex characteristics.
There is considerable evidence that widespread transitioning is the prefrontal lobotomy of the current age.
https://twitter.com/wesyang/status/1632829615101079555?t=bCDNjBQE_4i5Hjj7TLBGVg&s=19
The very liberal are detaching from reality
[Link]
“Also, a large part of the argument is that parents should not be involved in these decisions for minors”
Yes, some people do argue that. Chemjeff wasn’t arguing that. He was arguing the opposite.
Which is not the argument the trans activists are making that is causing a reaction from conservative leaning people. Also, why I brought up those other issues surrounding transitioning as a "treatment".
What is the proof it is effective treatment?
From a libertarian perspective, what difference does it make? I thought libertarians advocated for liberty for its own sake, even if the exercise of that liberty can sometimes lead to bad results.
We all here believe that drugs should be legal, no? Even though we all know that if drugs were fully legal, there would very likely be more addicts? We nonetheless believe that drugs should be legal because the War on Drugs is a cruel usurpation of liberty.
Same thing here.
So, “transitioning” is akin to destroying ones physical and mental health through the use of dangerous drugs?
Good to see that you’re coming around, Jeff.
“Same thing here.”
And sure, people should be free to fuck up their lives if they want.
But leave the kids out of it.
Gender-affirming therapy is a valid medical procedure that the government should not ban.
This is absolutely true.
And when we can do it we should definitely not ban it.
But the experimental fumbling steps we are taking today that surgically, hormonally and chemically provide a simulacrum (with varying accuracy) of being able to affirm gender should only be undertaken after extensive psychological screening, with full transparency and warnings by people who have been proven to be able to consent to such.
And never with children because they cannot have the experience needed to consent to such a thing.
I would suggest that most of the conservatives would be more for “live and let live” until confronted with the fact that trans activists specifically will not allow you to be ambivalent, and consider it violence against them if you even mildly disagree.
The recent extreme harassment and bullying of people trying to publicly play the Hogwart’s Legacy game because JK Rowling is apparently the Trans Activists Emmanuel Goldstein has been quite telling. They are angry and intolerant zealots.
Bullshit. They see it as a child abuse issue. They won't "live and let live" side by side with people they think are child abusers.
The push for a minor to have this done to them behind the parents back, and that agents of the state should work to keep it from the parents suggests they would not be wrong.
Where are minors getting getting hormones behind their parent's back? Oh- I forgot the steroids that coaches and other facilitators give to HS football players. That's a much bigger problem in pure numbers than trans therapy drugs. Why don't we hear more noise from the right wing on that abuse?
Is there an entire industry pushing to normalize steroid use?
And they do speak out. But teachers aren't doing it behind parents backs, calling it muscle affirming care, having doctors prescribe steroids for their children.
Some examples.
https://www.verywellfamily.com/anabolic-steroids-statistics-teen-drug-use-facts-2609070
https://medium.com/in-fitness-and-in-health/teenagers-taking-steroids-the-dark-side-of-bodybuilding-8a99ffbdbf43
Why trans is in the news more is because liberals are normalizing and encouraging it. That is not true of steroid use.
But you knew that so put up an idiotic argument.
There some guy on Twitter, Kibbles or something, that was very open about mailing gender drugs to minors
So steroids in men are bad but in girls they are OK? That's logical.
And the Right does not like steroids in high school sports, either. College or pro is not super vital to me.
And the Right does not like steroids in high school sports, either.
Since when are you the spokesman for all of The Right?
I certainly know conservatism infinitely better than you.
Way to conflate adults and children there jeff.
Note the reveal here:
Being transgender is not the same as bringing it into schools. It should be simple to accept one but not the other. CJ, as with the rest of the left, don't want this because the entire mission is creating social conflict they can use to demonize their enemies. So they substitute one subset for the other using one's defensibility to protect the other.
Transgenders have been around and open a long time without political effect. It was only when they started coaching children into it that it because a political issue. This is what CJ is protecting.
Plus remember that even though this is their mission they constantly claim the right is fighting the culture war, never themselves.
sorry, but the "bathroom wars" of 2015 had nothing to do with "coaching children". you are full of shit as usual.
You lie as you always do. The entire issue is in the public sphere only because left wingers insist on preaching transgenderism to children. It's revealing your number one priority is protecting this evangelical movement, but the lie is insisting the response to their initiative is itself the instigation. People like yourself are only interested in protecting their team, so they lie when necessary.
The internet is not real life.
I am now making $19k or more every month from home by doing very simple and easy job online from home. I have received exactly $20845 last month from this home job. Join now this job and start making cash online by
Follow instruction on website Here………….>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
everyone except shitlib journofucks and twitter transos are concerned about this.
every normal mom and dad who work and struggle and have to put their kids in public school is very alarmed by this insanity. every single one of them.
yes, voters care. Because most voters are regular folks with kids and grandkidsa nd they dont want teachers and drag queens to choose their kids' gender.
It's fuckinig astonishing that the left settled on this as their culture war moment. they are going to lose so badly it might even get ugly and I feel bad for regular old gays a nd transos who werent trying to be part of this.
they are going to lose so badly it might even get ugly
I believe that's the plan. Provoke people to the point where it gets so ugly that martial law can be justified.
Republicans are blowing it. LGBTQ people are natural conservatives. They want to live in freedom, without government intervention in their personal choices, which is what true conservatism really is. But instead they rail against their natural allies and alienate them, driving them to a party that wants to micromanage every aspect of their lives, except gender identity or sexual preference.
There is no such thing as "LGBTQ people". Those groups are distinct with differing interests.
It is normal and necessary to limit the "personal choices" of children.
Usually their parents or custodians are tasked with that job, not governors.
Usually parents and custodians are not allowed to do whatever they wish with their children, as if they were farm animals. Usually society protects children from harm, even at the hands of their parents.
I'm drowning in libertarianism here.
Harm is putting children in gay conversion camps. Or youth ministries. Keep children away from all religious leaders if you want to protect them from both brainwashing and sex abuse, that's what I say.
I'm glad you've given future Democratic leaders this option.
So, you think parents SHOULD be allowed to do whatever they wish with their children, as if they were farm animals? Is there anywhere you draw the line?
Hope to see you, Jeffy, and Mike tonight at the festival!
https://babylonbee.com/news/temple-of-moloch-hosting-family-friendly-child-sacrifice-event
theoretically you may be correct but not a single transo votes republican and converting them is a long con.
Yes. They should advocate for child mutilation for 1% of the vote. Good idea.
LGBTQ people are natural conservatives.
what does conservative mean in this sentence
They want to live in freedom, without government intervention in their personal choices, which is what true conservatism really is.
When LBGT find it politically useful that they be just like everyone else they claim that is the undeniable fact. Also when they find it politically useful to be different from everyone else they claim that is an undeniable fact. What wonderful magic fairy dust they must have.
^^^^^ BINGO ^^^^^^
The LGBTQ people aren't about being left alone at all.
They're about legislative favors for their identity-affiliation.
And is **** EXACTLY **** the reason they are part of the Nazi-Empire. It's the same with feminists and race groups. They're seeking sexist and racist Gov-Gun *entitlement*...
They want to live in freedom, without government intervention in their personal choices, which is what true conservatism really is.
That is not "true conservatism". What you describe is closer to libertarianism.
"True conservatism" is closer to the idea that people ought to be free to do whatever they like, as long as they conform to a narrow set of socially acceptable guidelines.
I had no idea that "YOU HAVE TO BAKE THAT CAKE!" is libertarianism. Learn something new all of the time.
^Leftards; A life of compulsive projection.
"I'm not robbing the bank... You're robbing me!" exclaims the robber holding up a bank with a Gun.
https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1632912031882805250?t=fU7cZk7E5WavkmXuzmnK5Q&s=19
BREAKING: Never before seen video of January 6 shows Jacob Chansley, the QAnon Shaman, being led through the Capitol by police the entire time that he was in the building.
[Video]
https://twitter.com/JesseKellyDC/status/1632890596506386440?t=rYB_O_j3K2O8PpEBSF7Eag&s=19
If you lived in anything other than a late stage republic, this would result in arrests. Not just outrage clicks. Not even calls to resign. This kind of abuse of government power should come with a 30 year prison sentience.
Stop the Cheka before it’s too late.
[Link]
There will be precisely zero punishments but we will hear about how Republicans and conservatives love their privilege and all.
Doesn't matter as long as the pro voters outnumber the con ones. If few people care about the issue, let alone make it a priority, then it's not going to turn off many voters. Elections between major party nominees are as much about not turning voters off as they are about turning them on. Sometimes an election is "yours to lose", and if you just don't motivate voters either way, you win.
Elections are mainly about counting the votes, and who gets to do so.
My friends makes 80-100 every hour on the internet..(SW-10) she has been without work for eight months but the previous month her revenue was 20,000 only working on the laptop 5 hours a day..
Check this……….>>>https://www.join.hiring9.com
Voters DO care. We are sick and tired of being told we MUST participate in the sexual fantasies of mentally ill people, and of our women having their sports opportunities robbed from them by the mentally ill.
Actually Camp, trans issues dominate CPAC because that's something the average person is being *forced* to care about.
When your doctor refers to you as a 'cervix-haver' and people tell you that you're transphobic because you speak Spanish . . .
"For example, while 72 percent of Republican parents reported strong opposition to classroom instruction about gender identity in elementary school, this opposition cooled by 20 percentage points when parents were asked about middle- and high-school instruction. Most notably, many Republican parents didn't seem to care much, with 40 percent reporting that it was neither good nor bad that their child had, or had not, learned about gender identity in middle or high school."
Are we being disingenuous or stupid here.
We've said all along that there is age-appropriate education on these topics. And the data show those R parents agree with that.
Hence why they consider it inappropriate in elementary and DGAF about it on high school.
But it's not high school that that education starts in, is it Camp? No, these people want to talk about ass-sex and cross-dressing in third grade.
Hence why they consider it inappropriate in elementary and DGAF about it on high school.
Yeah. It's funny how supposed naive conservative 50s parents tried to pretend their kids weren't having sex and now, these people, in their opposition to the supposed naive conservative 50s parents pretend that nobody conservative, since the 50s has had sex under the age of 21 and/or out of wedlock.
Dumbfucks, sex ed ended at HS and reduced teen birthrates. The reason we didn't proceed to pre-teen sex ed is because the pre-teen birth rates weren't a problem because pre-teen kids by-and-large aren't overtly sexual and/or sexually mature. If you were the least bit honest and objective about biology, sex, culture, sociology, education, or any of it, anything except pushing pedophilia, gender, and Marxist victim ideology on kids, this would be obvious.
CPAC is for the Republican base. Like The Daily Wire knows, that's where your money and support is. These folks now aren't distinguishing between rules for kids and adults. They are painting the whole subject the same. This approach will not attract independents. I really wonder how many transvestites your base Republicans have known in person. I'm gay and have know trannies for over 50 years. Even though they are harmless folks on their own, this new ideology makes them toxic. Aside from that, I know that it stems from mental illness. We don't buy into other mental illness delusions and these are no different. I don't believe in any protected classes and these are no exception.
Conservatives are exhausting. We all live in the same world. We all went through the same pandemic. We all are having to learn about trans people at the same time.
The only difference between conservatives and normal people is that normal people do not fixate their entire existence around this thing they are too stupid to understand right now.
Just stop being afraid, weak people. Wouldn't that be better for everyone?
We all live in the same world.
No, we don't.
JUST as soon as the [Na]tional So[zi]alist's stop pulling out Gov-Guns for their criminal plans.. Then conservatives will stop being afraid.
You Tony like most leftards still haven't accepted the FACT that 'government' is nothing but a monopoly of Gun-Force. When your tribe makes 'government plans' that aren't to ensure Individual Liberty and Justice for all you're making CRIMINAL plans with Gangster-GUNS.
And those plans are TREASONOUS and a THREAT to the USA as it violates the very foundation of this nation defined by the US Constitution.
It would be a lot better if Democrats would just EXIT the USA and go join the nation their criminal mentality aligns with like Cuba or Venezuela... You see but the problem is; you gangster-gun tribe has already CONQUERED and CONSUMED everything in those nations worth taking. That's EXACTLY why you are all here being criminal Jack*sses (oh; the party symbol fits so well) in order to conquer and consume this one. PLEASE LEAVE or learn to HONOR this NATION founded on Constitutional principles of Liberty and Justice for all.
So, I assume you agree that it is inappropriate, at the very least, for a trans stripper to perform a sexually charged "show" for children, correct? Also, you agree that it is medical malpractice and criminal to castrate children to "transition their gender". Also, the parents of children who are sexually confused should be included in any discussion about that sexual confusion and no "treatment" should be administered without the parents consent.
Children should be free to explore their sexuality or gender expression without being forced to come out to their parents. If you knew even a single gay or trans person, you'd understand why. Children and nobody else is allowed to have gender transition surgery without a rigorous psychological process. Why you think that should involve politicians is beyond me.
Define "sexually charged." Shall we ban cheerleaders from sports matches? Seems pretty sexually charged to me. Only 18+ at Hooters? Maybe I'm an outlier, but I don't think any child has ever been harmed by seeing a breast. Why don't you look deep inside yourself and discover what really is the source of your sex panic anxieties. Seems like more religious crap, protect people from knowledge you don't want them to have so you can control them.
Nobody is confused about what you want to do. You want to erase LGBT people from your tiny little sphere of understanding because it makes you uncomfortable to learn anything new about the world you didn't learn as a young child.
Again, fix yourself and leave everyone else alone.
Parents have a right and a need to know EVERYTHING about their children.
Children should be free to explore their sexuality...
That's pretty much a confession of your pedophilia. Thanks, once again, for your candor, Tony.
I would say voters with children care. Older people with grandchildren care. Of course leftist radical nuts that want to destroy the traditional family so the Village (i.e. government) can raise the children definitely don't care. There is no such thing as a sex change, your chromosomes cannot change. There is no such thing as de-transitioning either. You can have reconstructive surgery, but your sex glands are gone, you will not procreate, you will have to take hormones the rest of your life.
True. Even if Knowles did this He should have said something more along the lines of “trans-radicalist ideology/ gender marxism must be eradicated from public life.”
The headline would have still been Knowles wants Transgenderism eradicated from public life
The funny part to me is the words he says should have been used are basically the words Knowles actually used.