No.
If you fall back in front of the far right they will take that ground and demand more, as they always have done, and as they always will do. It’s how they win, it’s how they are winning, on trans rights, on immigration, on racial supremacy. Do not give them an inch. It’s not “all or nothing” it’s “give the bigots nothing”.
Ok, but what if you are not giving into demands, but stating your feelings that just happen to align, in that one area, with the right?
My point is that Trans issues have many different areas. Saying they’re wrong in one area does not mean you are abandoning trans people entirely and just as bad as the bigots that want harm done to them.
Just want to say, I don’t know all of what Newson has said, just read some articles that had 2 or 3 quotes. It’s hard to know what his overall opinions are, though.
I honestly cannot fathom how you can be looking at the situation of the US currently and not realising how wedge issues based on lies and bigotry work and the absolutely deletrious effect it is having on minorities.
Why are you falling for wedge issues that are designed to wipe out a group of people in a way that absolutely parallels actions taken by Nazis? Is a discussion about 10 athletes out of hundreds of thousands that important?
My entire point is that it is not “all or nothing”. You can say the debate on male/female athletics is a complicated one where both sides have valid point and also think literally everything else you posted is disgusting and should never be considered.
If we’re being honest, this sounds very reminiscent of how republicans in the early 2000s would take objections to the war as “not supporting the troops”. Or the way people that criticize Israel for their treatment of Palestine are called antisemitic when they fully support the Jewish people.
You can believe different things about each debate without being a full on bigot that wants to open concentration camps for trans children.
The thing is you don’t align with the far right. At least I hope you don’t anyway. The far right either hate trans people, or they do not give a shit about them either way. They are using trans people as a political football to sow exactly this type of division. Yes, trans people in sport is an unresolved problem. No, I do not want the right wing to be the ones to resolve it. If you align superficially, you still don’t want to cede to them. Bear in mind “align” only goes as far as saying “we can agree about this one sentence”, not this whole issue.
Godwin’s law is fucked these days so let’s just use the third Reich as an analogy. You may agree that Germany has a legitimate territorial claim on Alsace-Lorraine. Does that mean you should let the Nazis take it? No, you fight them and then resolve it when someone more reasonable is asking. The reasons why should be obvious, and so should the analogy. It’s not about whether the extremely superficial claim is “correct”, it’s about why they are saying it and what they plan to do if they get enough people to agree with them.
In this case, where the war is one of ideas, you’re not a bigot if you agree in a very superficial way, but it’s completely redundant to be talking about trans women in sport when all trans people are being stripped of their rights and it looks like things are getting worse. A year ago we were hoping (again) for the first female president; long overdue. That’s not an issue anymore, as women are now being erased from history.
You’ve outlined exactly why allowing the far right to resolve perceived social issues isn’t the way forward, especially when it comes to any sort of “minority” (which seems to be anything that isn’t non-immigrant white Christian cis straight men) issues.
Here’s what happens. A republican says 100 things, and 90 of which are batshit crazy and undeniable bullshit, but 10 of them are reasonable.
If we completely ignore the 10 reasonable things, then we lose all credibility in the argument when pointing the bullshit of the other 90 things.
I genuinely believe there are people out there that only hear the 10 reasonable things the republicans say and then see somebody like you completely dismiss those things and conclude that YOU are the unreasonable one. These people don’t pay attention the way you and I do, but still have the same voting power (if not more depending on the state they live in).
Your unwillingness to partition issues and treat them based on their individual merits will only lead to the opposition gaining more support and power.
No.
If you fall back in front of the far right they will take that ground and demand more, as they always have done, and as they always will do. It’s how they win, it’s how they are winning, on trans rights, on immigration, on racial supremacy. Do not give them an inch. It’s not “all or nothing” it’s “give the bigots nothing”.
Ok, but what if you are not giving into demands, but stating your feelings that just happen to align, in that one area, with the right?
My point is that Trans issues have many different areas. Saying they’re wrong in one area does not mean you are abandoning trans people entirely and just as bad as the bigots that want harm done to them.
Just want to say, I don’t know all of what Newson has said, just read some articles that had 2 or 3 quotes. It’s hard to know what his overall opinions are, though.
I honestly cannot fathom how you can be looking at the situation of the US currently and not realising how wedge issues based on lies and bigotry work and the absolutely deletrious effect it is having on minorities.
I suppose you’ll still be equivocating and making excuses when it’s gone past travel bans (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/marco-rubio-state-transgender-visa-b2704734.html), erasure of LGBT literature (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/banned-books-lgbtq-transgender-black-people-of-color-pen-america-rcna193879), banning of social and medical transition (https://www.hrc.org/resources/attacks-on-gender-affirming-care-by-state-map, https://www.msn.com/en-us/politics/government/texas-not-for-freedom-house-bill-could-ban-gender-affirming-care-for-transgender-adults/ar-AA1AjTF5), the creation of specific crimes for the existence of transgender people (https://msmagazine.com/2025/03/03/montana-hb-446-criminalizes-trans-existence-social-contagion/), the removal of protections in law (https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/01/23/trump-administration-moves-reject-transgender-identity-rights) and we’re in camps waiting to be “purified”.
Why are you falling for wedge issues that are designed to wipe out a group of people in a way that absolutely parallels actions taken by Nazis? Is a discussion about 10 athletes out of hundreds of thousands that important?
My entire point is that it is not “all or nothing”. You can say the debate on male/female athletics is a complicated one where both sides have valid point and also think literally everything else you posted is disgusting and should never be considered.
If we’re being honest, this sounds very reminiscent of how republicans in the early 2000s would take objections to the war as “not supporting the troops”. Or the way people that criticize Israel for their treatment of Palestine are called antisemitic when they fully support the Jewish people.
You can believe different things about each debate without being a full on bigot that wants to open concentration camps for trans children.
The thing is you don’t align with the far right. At least I hope you don’t anyway. The far right either hate trans people, or they do not give a shit about them either way. They are using trans people as a political football to sow exactly this type of division. Yes, trans people in sport is an unresolved problem. No, I do not want the right wing to be the ones to resolve it. If you align superficially, you still don’t want to cede to them. Bear in mind “align” only goes as far as saying “we can agree about this one sentence”, not this whole issue.
Godwin’s law is fucked these days so let’s just use the third Reich as an analogy. You may agree that Germany has a legitimate territorial claim on Alsace-Lorraine. Does that mean you should let the Nazis take it? No, you fight them and then resolve it when someone more reasonable is asking. The reasons why should be obvious, and so should the analogy. It’s not about whether the extremely superficial claim is “correct”, it’s about why they are saying it and what they plan to do if they get enough people to agree with them.
In this case, where the war is one of ideas, you’re not a bigot if you agree in a very superficial way, but it’s completely redundant to be talking about trans women in sport when all trans people are being stripped of their rights and it looks like things are getting worse. A year ago we were hoping (again) for the first female president; long overdue. That’s not an issue anymore, as women are now being erased from history.
Thank you for making this post.
You’ve outlined exactly why allowing the far right to resolve perceived social issues isn’t the way forward, especially when it comes to any sort of “minority” (which seems to be anything that isn’t non-immigrant white Christian cis straight men) issues.
Thanks for saying so, I’m glad that the message came across.
Here’s what happens. A republican says 100 things, and 90 of which are batshit crazy and undeniable bullshit, but 10 of them are reasonable.
If we completely ignore the 10 reasonable things, then we lose all credibility in the argument when pointing the bullshit of the other 90 things.
I genuinely believe there are people out there that only hear the 10 reasonable things the republicans say and then see somebody like you completely dismiss those things and conclude that YOU are the unreasonable one. These people don’t pay attention the way you and I do, but still have the same voting power (if not more depending on the state they live in).
Your unwillingness to partition issues and treat them based on their individual merits will only lead to the opposition gaining more support and power.