/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>2832678
>>2832689
There's been a global decline in support for all LGBT rights, not just trans people. There's been a global decline in support for the left wing in general if you haven't noticed, that's what fascists controlling all the media gets you. You're very blatantly a grifter trying to pin everything on the most vulnerable group, fuck off.

>>2832949
For the USA, this is marked by a decline of the support by republicans, you'll notice that among democrats it stayed relatively the same.
However transgender rights have decline all across the board, all across generations.
You'll also see that trans rights have been declining even in the UK, despite the left being far more popular among the Youth.
As for the Media, while you have anti-trans media, you also have large media in their favor (CNN being the most obvious exemple) you can solely pin this on the media, and if anything people are a lot more exposed to pro trans views recently then they have been historically.
Analysing the flaws of a movement advocating for a group of people, doesn't mean I hate the group of people.
Think about this, if the fascist media was the main reason for the change of opinion on trans stuff, then why is Trump's support declining ?
Because people, while influenced, aren't slaves to the media, and they can create their own opinion based on other things.

So then, clearly the movement is failing to convince people of its righteouness, and if its the case, it should look itself as to why, instead of insulting the people they're supposed to convince.

>>2832449
>Geeee I wonder who started this?
I mean you did

>I'll get kicked out? I think that's normal.
<what if I took the most extreme example
The problem is that any example I pick will be deemed anecdotic. But frankly, you should try it yourself. Go to any college and start talking about sensitive topics, not extreme racial nonsense, but any "polarized" theme like immigration or israel and see where it gets you.

>Literally the first result on Google
And ? Am I meant to be surprised that when googling a specific sentence you get a specific result lol ?

>>2832484
>What does this even mean?
the weird in-group behavior that always spirals out of control, the omnipresence of bizarre sexual fetishes, the constant hypersexualization of everything, the grotesque deformation of symbols associated with feminity/masculinity etc.
It's seldom "I just want to transition, change my name, my pronouns, and my general appearance", it's more often "actually i identify as non-binary homosexual and do drag shows on tuesdays".
Note that all this is essentially a result from in-group behavior which spirals out of control because of the general ostracism that they get. However, if I were to say this to anybody that I know irl on the left, I'd be "cancelled" immediatly.

>What fucking drugs are you on?
Sorry I realized that I typed this wrong. What I was trying to say was that majority of left-leaning people support trans' rights but have this collective denial of the aforementionned issues, that feed very well into the conservative culture war.

>>2832751
>Yes treating a group of people as second class citizens
Sorry anon but there is a biological reality to sex. You can whichever gender you use but there is a qualitative difference between the sexs with real implications.

>let the Epstein-class continue raping transhumanists without any resistance
Pretty much validates everything that was said up until now. You're not the center of attention. You're not the primary contradiction under the capitalist mode of production. You're a tiny speck concerned about identity-recognition. The constant monopolization of the center of attention is why people got annoyed, and why support for your cause has declined.

>>2832756
>As for Epstein, he raped cisgender women ? He litterally has nothing to do with what I'm talking about
He also raped trans women. One of the first people to publically accuse Epstein was a trans woman, but nobody took her seriously because she was trans. The Epstein Files revealed that him and his ilk were funding the anti-trans movement to discredit trans women so they could continue to rape them without any public backlash. I'm sure you don't actually care but you can read more about all his connections to transphobia here:
https://transnews.network/p/epstein-backed-prominent-anti-trans-figures
https://www.transgendermap.com/people/jeffrey-epstein/
>Studies show that despite medical treatement, there still exists a physical difference between trans and cis women. This is mostly important for sports.
The literal fucking Olympics did a study proving that trans women have no biological advantage over cis female athletes (and infact are disadvantaged in most ways). Notice how a trans woman has never won a SINGLE Olympic medal, let alone gold? Hormones change your entire biology, trans women are more biologically female than they are biologically male.
Even if they DID have a small advantage that's not any more justification for banning them than it is for banning especially tall races of people from basketball. It's all the same ridiculous talking points they used to try to ban black people from sports back in the day.
>But yes calling it state murder is reductive
So all the women dying in the states because they can't access life saving abortion aren't being murdered either I guess? Or does it suddenly count when they're not transhumanists?
>You're smugly and angrily calling me a pedophile and trying to pin for the death of trans women to cancer. Simply because a fairly mild disagreement with you. And then you wonder why support for trans rights are decreasing
the fucking sealioning lmao, you are NOT beating the grifter allegations

>>2833009
>He also raped trans women. One of the first people to publically accuse Epstein was a trans woman, but nobody took her seriously because she was trans.
Point taken, I didn't know he did that.
Still, he did fund both sides of the debate, since he funded trangender doctor Jess Ting. Still, I don't think he's necessarly a reflexion of the entire bourgeois class, Jennifer Pritzker for exemple is a trans woman billionnaire.

>The literal fucking Olympics did a study proving that trans women have no biological advantage over cis female athletes (and infact are disadvantaged in most ways). Notice how a trans woman has never won a SINGLE Olympic medal, let alone gold?

The Olympics study doesn't say that tho. And there has been multiple studies showing that transgender women retain a higher physical strenght even on the midterm. And while no trans woman won in the Olympics, some did win in other sports, notably Lia Thomas in swimming. Also, it's not just the gold metal that matters, especially if you take in account team sports.


>Hormones change your entire biology, trans women are more biologically female than they are biologically male.

While Hormones change some secondary sex charateristics, it doesn't change everything, like chromosones or the capacity to carry a child. The latter one being the sociological reason for the distinction between men and women.


>Even if they DID have a small advantage that's not any more justification for banning them than it is for banning especially tall races of people from basketball. It's all the same ridiculous talking points they used to try to ban black people from sports back in the day.

It's not the same thing, we don't distinguish between races for sport, we do between sexes ? We should let cis women have a chance at winning sports.

>So all the women dying in the states because they can't access life saving abortion aren't being murdered either I guess? Or does it suddenly count when they're not transhumanists?

No, I think the abortion bans are wrong, but they're not murder.
In any case the NHS isn't denying people because they're trans. They just have to take an appointment after your 50s, same as men, as both trans women and men are less likely to get breast cancer then women.
Now, you can disagree with this policy, but if it's murder for trans women, is it murder of men as well ?

>the fucking sealioning lmao, you are NOT beating the grifter allegations
Do you just throw words at random, I am not "sealioning" I'm not spamming you with requestion for sources, and I am not a "grifter" I'm not asking anyone for money.
Again, you're not awnsering the question, how exacly do you think you're appearing to the random normie uninformed by the matters ? Do you think you sound sane and reasonable ? I've never once insulted you and you randomly started insulting me for once again, very mild disagreement.

>>2833041
Stop concern trolling, you are a transphobe, we know it and you know it, it is insulting for you to pretend differently.

You know what I think? If the existence of transwomen upsets a few feminist sacred cows, GOOD! We've let them run roughshod over the rest of society for too long!

>>2833048
if you dont want to get beaten maybe dont be a boxer? also, the other women literally was not even trans

>>2833048
That was an algerian cis woman who almost got her life ruined by the retards who transvestigated her based on an insult her opponent threw in the moment.
>ok it doesn't matter that this didn't happen transhumanists just own cis women at everything and i know it o algo

>>2833050
Wonder why trans right support is falling down among the general public.

>muh sports, muh competition
Fuck sports yo. People arent equal.

>>2833275
Were spanish paraolympics players right to fake down syndrome ?

>>2833279
It was for the greater good

>>2833281
I stand with the proletarian and historically progressive spanish down syndrome fakers against the Bourgeois, reactionnary Para-OlympiKKKs actually handiKKKaped players..

>>2832573
The first part of your post is obviously correct, that is why trans and their rights have increased even in countries where gay rights isnt on the menu unlike what phrygian cap anon said.
The other part with tumblr twitter british journos is bullshit though.
>>2833200
By being correct too loudly? I don't particularly like the histrionic trans activists and their weepy "le most harmless demographic" rethoric for being wrong and sentimatlist; they are actually a remarkably sturdy and influencial demographic as Nick Land said. But they are correct about pretty much everything else. And they are also being actively discriminated against throught both top-down measures and horizontal violence.
None of the people itt would be "sensible moderates" on the issue if the same happenned to any other group from homosexuals to ethnics, by the way.
>>2832973
It shows democrats and independant declining too. Just not as sharply.
But the actual reason for the decline on the left, despite the left becoming more popular is because of the brown electrorate i don't know why people pretend not to see the elephant in the room.
Brown diasporics hates racism and do not like LGBT, and as the center-right collapsed the far-right have become more openly racist so they flock to the left, they are a very narcissistic crowd.

But to get back on the main subject. The chud's post pictured here may be in bad faith but is a good if vulgar summary of why the left can't do anything.
It hates actual existing violence and it hates the people that have the guns and it hates the personality types willing to enact the violence*. The brown people among it also have a very obvious axe to grind against white men.

*Unless the one doing the violence is some retarded brown schyzophrenic/drug addict stabbing a random person. Transformative violence is not allowed.

>>2833359
>By being correct too loudly?
I was replying to insults hurled against me. My point being that you don't endear people to a cause by insulting those who disagree even slightly. An attitude that is unfortunatly common among certain trans activists and hasn't helped their reputation.
>But they are correct about pretty much everything else.

Trans activists don't have a sole coherent ideological position. They all carry philosophical positions that can be criticised, especially the refusal to see the material reality of biological sex in human relations.
Beyond that, political activism necessarly implies some sort of compromise and accepting to work with groups you have disagreement with. Trans activists often refused to do as such. Alienating people who might be sympathetic.

>None of the people itt would be "sensible moderates" on the issue if the same happenned to any other group from homosexuals to ethnics, by the way.

Back when segregation was a thing, most communist supported the relatively moderate position of equality between black and whites instead of black revanchism or nationalism.

>>>2832973 (You)
>It shows democrats and independant declining too. Just not as sharply.
Independants are declining but democrats are well within the margin of error, and are still essentially at the same level they were in 2021. Not the case for trans rights.
>But the actual reason for the decline on the left, despite the left becoming more popular is because of the brown electrorate.
In the USA this isn't true, Black and Latino support for the democrats is declining, and so is support for trans rights. They can't be responsible for the decline there.
In general, the decline has been heavy and fast, and Immigration can't explain it. Immigrants have also always voted to the left, in the UK, Labour was historically the most important party for muslims, until Israel started genociding Gaza (bar a short period of time after 2003).
The decline of support for trans rights in the left just reflect a decline of support everywhere else.

The fact that the first anti-trans post in this thread got jannied really just proves his point when mods let blatant /pol/tards, glowies and all flavors of anti communists shit up the board nonstop

>>2833370
There has been several pro-trans posts nuked itt including one of mine

>>2833377
Legitimate question. Give me a non-moralist reason why not. Remember that agitation within capitalist militaries was mandatory for parties to be granted membership in the Comintern.

>>2829222
General response to OP, the left needs to be a bad boy and fun again, in spite of all the fucked up shit in the world. There are correct times to weaponise empathy (7 month old Palestinian baby being shot in the face is a good example and makes anyone making fun of it look like a paychopath to basically anyone thats not final level conservautist), but degrading conservatives as being neurotic and terrified of migrants, or men being put in positions of vulnerability and making them out as wokefinder generals (all true) will butcher the cool factor these people have. The Fuentes rightoid types are smart enough to pivot away from Trump because of Epstein and Israel association, but going after the shitcons (like the shitlibs) and making it as embarrassing as possible to be one is a great strategy imo. Turn the monster they created against them and make them blatant hypocrites so they have to resort to theory, where the left will naturally kick their ass.

>>2833427
Oh yeah and also, stop making the trans arguments the front and center of the debate. The right will run rings around you on an optics level for the median person. You can still be pro-trans without centralising the leftist identity on it. It's objectively one of the issues the left struggles with.

>>2833363
What alternative do you want? Yeah actually being US imperialist is cool and based? It's fine to be a leftist veteran but not one that still thinks it was all cool and correct like Platner

>>2833370
I dont think pointing out that Queer Nationalism controlled the western left for decades is transphobic.(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)

>>2833435
you people can't help yourselves, this is why nobody believes your 'we just need to de-centre LGBT issues' bullshit

>>2833436
Is it untrue?
Queer rights have been a large fight the western left has been undergoing for the last 30 years.
The bourgeoisie always lets it happen. When things go to class like occupy did or imperialism like with Israel they shut it down.

>>2833439 (me)
The most cruelly ironic is trans people had more rights, freedoms, and privileges then. People really hate them now. Its sad. In the 90s early 00s there were plenty of trans folks and no one could tell and no one cared.
Its only now that people do.

>>2833440
Why do you think that is?

>>2833377
Solider are more human then any HR employee. I trust them more for the revolution.

>>2833440
Hiding isn't the same as actually having rights

>>2833452
retard

>>2833453
I will report you to HR for having called me a retard.

>>2833464
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6515308/

I guess you'll just accuse the scientists behind the study of being nazis.

>>2833467
That wasn't the point

>>2833467
>In the 2260 trans women in the cohort, 15 cases of invasive breast cancer were identified (median duration of hormone treatment 18 years, range 7-37 years). This was 46-fold higher than in cisgender men (standardised incidence ratio 46.7, 95% confidence interval 27.2 to 75.4) but lower than in cisgender women (0.3, 0.2 to 0.4).
>Oestrogen was prescribed as ethinylestradiol (25 to 100 µg daily), conjugated oestrogens (0.625 to 1.25 mg daily), estradiol patches (50 to 150 µg/24 hours twice weekly), estradiol implants (20 mg every 3 to 6 months), estradiol injections (10 to 100 mg every 2 to 4 weeks), estradiol valerate (2 to 6 mg daily), or estradiol gel (0.75 to 3.0 mg daily)
Interesting. I suspect the lower boob cancer rate might be either due to hondose (2mg oral geeeeeeeg) or due to the treatment monitoring trans women will usually do. Still, 46 times higher than cis males doesn't look good for the NHS insofar as limiting the ability for trans women to get breast cancer screening given that it makes up 4.6% lifetime risk according to the stats given.

>>2833474
It's still less then cis women, in times of long waiting lists it's not shocking they prioritize the people most likely to be affected from it. Same reason as to why it's harder for men or young women to be screened. It's not great but the solution is to improve the NHS by recruiting more doctors. I don't think they actually ban trans women (or men) from being screened, but you have to take an appointment instead of it being automatic.

>>2833432
The issue is with the entire framing of the question, which focuses on interrogating the morality of joining the military instead of assessing the utility of having soldiers and veterans in the movement.

>>2832973
I think your model of public opinion is incompatible with the information you quote in your opening line: if Democrat opinion on trans issues stayed static while Republicans became negatively polarized, then the problem isn't that people saw undesirable transgender activists and were repulsed. If that was true, you'd see a drop with both parties, possibly even a greater drop with Dems (who'd be exposed to trans activists as part of their broader anti-right coalition.) compared to Republicans (for whom trans people are a total outgroup that are barely ever encountered for real.)

This model can even explain why opinion worsened in the UK to a much higher extent: Because the centre-left parties threw trans people under the bus, and people tend to go along with their party at least a little bit. (e.g. Democrats correctly see anti-trans posturing as a Republican thing, while in the UK every major party bar the Greens goes along with it, so it's just "common sense")

You must ask yourself why you're drawn to analyze the flaws of transgender activists as though they're the ones with agency in this situation. One man, Donald Trump, has far more influence on aggregate public opinion than the entirety of transgender activists throughout history. (If you don't believe me: look at support for war with Iran and watch Republicans immediately fall into line behind him. Run the maths on that many people switching their view instantly.)
You can of course say: well, you need to analyze it because they are stuck with this situation and they do have some agency, but any realistic analysis starting from that perspective must first confront the very marginal agency activists actually have and the multitude of motivations their opponents had.

Allow me a tortured metaphor: perhaps Your Party (dumb name) in England would've done better if they'd run on a better policy platform with better rhetoric. But if you adopt their polices and rhetoric as your source for why they failed, you will ignore 99.99% of the reasons for their disastrous results. They were up against much stronger opponents while being in total disarray internally. (I say "in England" because they literally couldn't even organise running candidates in Scotland and Wales, something random individuals are capable of doing independently.) The first step, then, is not the rhetoric or policy of YP activists, but their actual structure as activists, if you could adopt worse policies and worse rhetoric in exchange for a better structure you'd get a much better result.
But even then better is relative, because electoral politics is a game full of much more powerful players. Even a well structured party with good activists and good policies can flop because the powers levelled against you are massively more powerful (in YP's case, for example, the gambit was to become a ~10mp ~few hundred councillors left-opposition, rather than to replace Labour), and even in a best-case scenario you have to analyse the result (which would be, numerically, "a disaster") in that light.

The same is true basically of trans activism: if the US president decides your group is on his shit list, it doesn't matter who you've got behind you, you're going to have a bad time. See Iran's nuclear deal for what happens when you're on the shit-list and decide to try the moderate conciliatory approach.

>>2833200
>Wonder why trans right support is falling down among the general public.
A lot of Americans just have LGBT activism fatigue. Particularly when a lot of the activism has shifted away from like "we deserve basic rights like the right to marry and the right to fuck who we want and the right to assimilate into society" and onto petty shit like "if you wouldn't date a trans woman you're a nazi" and shaming people for perceived microaggressions. It all seems like a huge fucking waste of time unless you're terminally online.

>>2833590
I think peoople are tired of "slacktivism" like you are mentioning.
People know they need material change. They cant afford groceries. They dont need to lectured about microagressions againt the queer diaper fur gender fae /faeself next door.

>>2833628
exactly. i think it's a good thing people are getting more serious about the materialist line of politics.
also many of the fascists currently destroying the world are fags themselves(peter thiel, jd vance, lindsay graham, sam altman, curtis yarvin, etc) so many subconsciously see it as queers being an active part of the bourgeois.

>>2833532
>I think your model of public opinion is incompatible with the information you quote in your opening line: if Democrat opinion on trans issues stayed static while Republicans became negatively polarized, then the problem isn't that people saw undesirable transgender activists and were repulsed.
I was talking about Gay rights here, there has recently been a decline in support for Gay Marriage among republicans and independants.

>If that was true, you'd see a drop with both parties, possibly even a greater drop with Dems (who'd be exposed to trans activists as part of their broader anti-right coalition.) compared to Republicans (for whom trans people are a total outgroup that are barely ever encountered for real.)

This is the case for most trans rights related issue, both parties dropped in support, and while overall the democrats still support trans rights more then republicans, the decline was larger among democrats then republicans. This isn't the case with Gay Marriage.

>This model can even explain why opinion worsened in the UK to a much higher extent.

Not really, the decline was happening before Labour turned on the trans people, they're following popular opinion. Beyond that, the rise of the Greens amongst the Youth hasn't improved support for trans rights.

>One man, Donald Trump, has far more influence on aggregate public opinion than the entirety of transgender activists throughout history.

It's not just an american or british phenomenon. but even then, while Trump could explain it for US republicans, I don't think he can explain it for the democrats or the independants. I also don't think the Iran war is the best exemple, since you do have a large chunk of republicans opposed to it. Even then, Trump isn't personally radically transphobic, he hung out with drag queens and shit. He, as he often does, advocate for policies he sees as being popular, thats why during his campaigns in 2016-20 he didn't do much about trans people, even saying that trans people should use the bathrooms they feel like, he only started attacking trans people because they were unpopular, and a weak point of the Democrats.
>but any realistic analysis starting from that perspective must first confront the very marginal agency activists actually have and the multitude of motivations their opponents had.

I don't disagree, but when there is a decline among different countries, in all categories, all political parties, all age ranges, there is clearly a larger issue then simply Trump's propaganda. Activists do have agency, it can be positive, but it can also be negative, activists can hurt their movement.

>Allow me a tortured metaphor: perhaps Your Party (dumb name) in England

Your party entirely shot themselves in the foot, sure it's not solely their policies, but they were disorganised and incompetent, had they actually worked themselves out, they could have taken the place the Greens now hold.

> See Iran's nuclear deal for what happens when you're on the shit-list and decide to try the moderate conciliatory approach.

I think there is plenty of difference between how a nation should react and how activists should.
Gay activists were attacked during Bush's term, but they didn't embrace weird radicalism and preferred to appear normal to the general population, gaining their sympathy.
Trans activists, who by definition want the support of the population as they want people to consider them as the gender they desire to be. Have acted in very moralistic ways and pushed for very unpopular demands, typically in sports or about children, instead of trying to garner sympathy for people. There is also a strong morality culture among trans activists, they won't accept to work with someone who agrees mostly with them but they think that nonbinary isn't real for exemple.(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)

>>2833643
Only Thiel and Altman are gay in your list, Yarvin is an occasional chaser though.
Graham apparently cheat on his wife with a woman so the gay thing was hallucinated.

Opinion polls and trans issues aside. I don't care about the opinions of idiot goyim. If 70% of the cattle that gets interviewed for these studies shout about le African replacement and TWD does that mean I should get with the program and advocate to deport half of the browns as a moderate centrist position? You can be correct while being unpopular. Democracy is a sham and pollsters are part of the media industrial complex. Their kvetching is entirely self-motivated.

>>2834039
This zionist is trying to split us

>>2834039
Based and correct position.

>>2834039
Mods permaban this bordigger

>>2833377
>>2833420
>>2833363
Maybe the answer is evident:
The west is morally demonic and hence not worthy of being saved. The average westoid is a demon worshipper. If the west does not subjugate the rest of the world a la palantir manifesto, it will destroy itself. You can't do a revolution in a satanic society. Just work on what happens after the civil war leftychuds.

>>2833982
>Graham apparently cheat on his wife
Graham never married lol.