This seems so…sane. I know many Albertans don’t agree. But I’d love to hear people’s thoughts, and also if anyone knows any backstory about how this happened, please share. Is such a policy possible here in the States?
Oh, I guess not. Look what’s happening in New York State: a bill that helps minors transition without parental knowledge or consent. Has anybody written to their NYS assembly people to comment? If so, please share and we’ll put it in the “letters to change minds” section.
Lisa-- I signed and added the following message: "I'm a liberal Upper West Sider and I oppose this bill. I strongly urge you to review the many reasons this is poor public policy and dangerous to our youth, and to reconsider your support. Minors should be given every opportunity to explore gender roles with full parental and community support. But as with deciding to marry, give sexual consent, or buy tobacco or weapons, they do not yet have the maturity to make irrevocable medical decisions they may later regret. Thank you."
Thanks for the heads up, Lisa, and I want to second encouraging folks who write their own letters to pass them on to you. (I don’t have a clear enough handle on how the proposed changes alter the underlying statute to do it myself, or I would mock something up and send it on.) I’m hoping some others may here may be conversant enough with the statute (which I think? in part has to do with the long-standing concept of the “emancipated minor”) to come up with a draft letter.
Thanks for the head's up on this. Here is my response:
This legislation is dangerous and can only cause harm to minors. It has no beneficial aspects. Homeless or parentless (or emancipated) children already can receive medical care provided through Medicaid. This new legislation basically removes parental control or even knowledge of medical treatments (including experimental treatments) performed on their minor children without even a minimum age. The decision whether these children can consent to such medical interventions is left to those performing the services, ignoring motives such as profit, opportunity for experimentation or grandiose notions of "saving the world." This legislation must be rejected.
Lisa, this is way off point, but I see that Joe Burgo has written an interesting piece in Reality’s Last Stand regarding treating men with AGP (as you may well already know, you are quoted in it). I thought it might be interesting to put it out for discussion here or in a chat. Just a thought.
Agree with you. I was amazed on listening to it yesterday, and am also interested in the backstory. I think on the sports aspect, Linda Blades may have been helpful, from a comment someone made. This is a good example of how much better off we would be if folks didn’t view this through a partisan lens. While Smith is conservative politically, from what I see, I thought everything about this, including her empathetic presentation, is a model Ds and Rs alike could and should follow. I did have some question marks on the age limits, but going for perfection right about now is hardly sensible, and the approach she laid out will prevent a lot of harm, if enacted.
I don't know what specifically led to this policy inside the Alberta government, but over the past six months or so several provinces with conservative governments have begun adopting rules about parental notification or consent to change names and pronouns in schools. At the same time the federal Conservative Party is surging in the polls. The federal Conservative Party convention recently adopted policy resolutions calling for limits on hormone therapy and transgender surgery for minors, and protecting women's spaces. So I think there's more room to have these discussions in Canada now than there was a few years ago.
I'm not surprised that Alberta is the first province in Canada to adopt this policy. Alberta has a reputation for being politically conservative and is sometimes called "Canada's Texas", even though it it probably politically closer to a midwestern swing state. They tend to go their own way politically and ignore the orthodoxy coming out of central Canada, as they also did during COVID.
As a democratic socialist i applaud this attempt at clear policy. However a few issues;
1. hormones and blockers 16/17 is still too young to undergo such potential permanent harm including sterilization
2. Alberta needs to work on language: hers is confusing. “Female” is a biological state, not an identity state. So she should refer to “trans identified boys” in sport not “transgender females” - that would be a trans identified girl aka a trans boy or trans man! Confused? That’s the point!
This matters also because as a child identity is not rigid, “trans girl” implies something fixed, wile trans identified male tells us the biologically male child currently identifies as a girl. This language matters, because sex matters
Not a democratic socialist myself, but I agree with number 1 and number 2! No alcohol til age 21, but puberty blockers at 16 (!). And changing name without parental consent -so effectively socially transitioning. Still too young. I think we can quibble about the age-18 vs 21 -but anything under 18 is a no go for me due to the castration/lack of orgasm. It’s just so unethical to take that away before a person fully appreciates what it means to be a sexual adult.
Smith (the woman in the video) is a conservative politician, she is trying to thread carefully and reach not only the neutral people who have little awareness and/or stakes in this gender stuff, but also those in the opposing side. Using the kind of language you want (TIM, trans identified boy for MTFs and viceversa for FTMs) will immediately spark a mental shutdown in the opposing side which is where arguably most trans youth and gender dysphoric youth lie currently (you know, the people you all allegedly want to hear you and be 'saved' and reach out??) for being an inflammatory "transphobic dogwhistle" and what happens after that? She (Smith) is dismissed and anything she says will not be listened to because she is already branded evil with evil thoughts and sus language. And what happens then? The campaign is a failure and bridging efforts are wasted once again. And if its gonna fail then why bother? Money wasted, time wasted. If people dont want actual tangible bridging and just want to preach to their choir they can just go write a blog or a mini rant on twitter for their pre-aligned followers and call it a day.
Watch the video again, read between the lines and you'll understand Smith is clearly trying to compromise here just like when some politically homeless people use They pronouns for transitioners because they dont want to use she for transwomen and he for transmen (preferring sex-based pronouns instead of gender identity-based pronouns) but also understand that using he for TW and she for TM as default will be taken as problematic and cause immediate thought termination in readers, or worse, bring a storm of derailed discussion about why the writer used the evil pronouns and if the author wants trans people to die instead of whatever THE ACTUAL TOPIC being written about was. Smith and others behind the campaign likely understand that the pre-approved language in those circles is "trans women" (with a space) and "transgender females" not shemales, not transsexuals, not TIMs, not troons, not dysphoric boys, not feminized males, not men pretending to be women. The code is that you refer by what they'd like to be, not what they were born as.
Lisa Davis and Chimamanda Adichie also compromise in language; both women support gender role nonconformity, respect preferred pronouns and names but still see women (females) as distinct from transwomen-transfeminines (mtfs) and men (males) from transmen-transmasculines (ftms) while not seeing transitioners as lesser or evil people, just different demographics of human beings (for Adichie's discussion see: https://youtube.com/watch?v=LBaVveCMXuk&pp=ygUkY2hpbWFtYW5kYSBhZGljaGllIHRyYW5zZ2VuZGVyIHdvbWVu/ at the 15:30 mark). Pro-Trans gender identity believers often think you must see trans women as full women period or else it is assumed you not only want them to "man up and dress down" but also see them as lesser, gross, deserving of mistreatment and point at examples of conservative homophobes as an example of that. Lisa already understands that if she truly wants to paint a broad nonpartisan picture and be heard by more people she has to thread differently from those that do hurt the mixed cluster of GNC-dysphoric-trans youth, and that includes how you word things. A lot of trans-critical people miss this mark and get lost in the echo chambers, with even detransitioners getting bruised in the crossroads (see: https://somenuanceplease.substack.com/p/lets-talk-about-how-we-talk-about )
Yes sex matters, but so does the effectivity and consequences of one's message.
I'm also Canadian. Every time I see a person I know, virtue signal their support for this ideology, I wonder if they have looked deeply into the issue or if they've bought into the suicide narrative without hearing the counter arguments. They see it as coming from a place of kindness. I have trouble seeing it as kind though, because the long term effects, could potentially be devastating. Have these virtue signalers heard the mounting detransitioner stories? Have they heard about all the countries in Europe adopting a more rational and wait and see approach? Do they understand that under the 'trans' umbrella, there are autogynaphilic men, kids with autism who find gender roles confusing, that girls are more likely to fall into a contagion like this? That list is probably longer than that. I was a person, who was living day to day life, not thinking much on the issue until one day, I saw an influencer (menopausal weightloss), write 'transwomen go through menopause, too". It was just a statement with no follow up answers as to how or why? A virtue signaling statement. I thought, well, how does that work? So it lead me down the rabbit hole of seeking truth. My eyes are wide open. I wonder what makes other people start to question?
It does seem very sane. As a Canadian though I know how reviled she is in liberal circles, in liberal media. So unfortunately I don’t think it will do much to De politicize the issue here in Canada
I wish this surprised me! But I do think a sane voice from the conservatives is still an important step. I wish everyone had a conservative approach to medical experimentation on children!!
Sometimes in the US, the messages from the right seem less sane than hers does here, and I worry that those voices just throw tons of fuel on the fire in this country. But it is vexing that such extraordinary sanity is still vilified- the left’s “no debate” impulse on this topic is so prevalent and frustrating!
Be amazed as much as you like but she is depicted as the devil in the media currently and they promise to fight back. I saw in La Presse this morning that people are lawyering up against the policy. There are 3 provinces going that route at this time, and us, in Québec, are disgusted, apparently, which means that my boy could be called a girl at school and I wouldn’t know. Justin will fight back at her.
The thing is: they now have to explicitly defend the indefensible. Explain WHY kids under 15 need to be given drugs that will dissolve their bones and damage their brains and put them at higher risk of cardiac complications. Explain WHY teachers need special secrets with children that are kept from parents.
Before they had the advantage of everything they wanted just being policy that had been ushered through to no publicity and no debate; they didn't have to articulate the tee-ninesiest of defenses of their positions.
Now they are doing the standard dance: "we don't need this law because this stuff isn't even happening! No one is dissolving the bones of children or grooming them at school! But also, if they are, it's a good thing".
Justin just publicly denounced Danielle Smith. She is a conservative and therefore, one must stand against everything she says. Her environmental stance is awful, so I guess there is no nuance to be had there.
I hope it sticks. That made me wonder what is the policy in Quebec. We don’t hear about trans anything much. My 14 had a friend who’s older brother had someone in his class to talk about trans, but it didn’t spread.
Yesterday, my son who’s 14 could sign to participate in a judo competition without my consent, and I snapped at the coach because we didn’t want him to go. Consent is either everything or nothing.
Danielle Smith is the only politician I've encountered during my lifetime whom I like MORE after she's attained office than I liked when she was running.
She was a bit of a flame-thrower when she was on the sidelines, sort of dumb conservative agitprop stuff. I voted Conservative in the last election (not that it matters in my riding, which in a rigidly NDP university town) because the NDP have lost their damn minds, but I liked Rachel Notley as a person more than I liked Danielle Smith as a person.
but now: I'm ride or die! I'll campaign for her to the ends of the earth, she's done something the national party leader (Pierre Polievre) hasn't come close to having the sand to do. We need more -- men OUT of women's prisons, for example. But this is a real start.
It happened through a local grassroots organization called Take Back Alberta who kind of took over the Governing party’s board. They attended the policy conference and put forward these proposals which were voted on by the party and carried. They have also started getting involved in school trustee elections. They are trying to solve issues locally with citizen participation. There is backlash and name calling of course. Also, I believe fasting and prayer movements help
Needs rewrite. You can't "alter your biological sex." Perhaps "alter your biological sex characteristics" would work. Removing breasts does not alter the biological sex of the woman removing her breasts, but it does alter her secondary sex characteristics. Otherwise, bully for Alberta and its premier.
This is certainly is an outstanding start. I think this is a great template for any leader who needs a direction on how to push back on the current barreling forward of the gender cult. While I understand she couldn’t address every detail in a statement like this, a reminder that parents rights should be the default position would have been good. Also, questioning or disagreeing with the “gender affirming” model is not bullying.
This is sanity. Trans activist already talking about the premier having blood on her hand though. As a Norwegian it' good to see that the woke madness in Canada is meeting resistance. Of course, the new policy is not extreme anti trans in any way, basically return to sanity as we now see in Europe
Wow! How refreshing. I am skeptical that liberals won’t tear this apart and her comments will become political as everything, even unpolitical at the outset, seems to. Yet, I am hopeful! So incredibly sane and compassionate. Love it!
Yes, I used to even consider myself a progressive, but not since my kid started down this gender path 5 years ago. I think there are more sane liberals out there than we know. But the liberal political agenda is all in, seemingly, on this trans movement for kids. I have not seen anything yet to disprove this, and so therefore remain “politically homeless”.
If you look to folks like Bari Weiss, Jesse Singal, Shannon Thrace and Carole Hooven, you'll see examples of liberals like me.
Unfortunately, too many in the Democratic Party have signed on to this gender jihad, but I think the worm is turning on that. Gender-critical material is even appearing in the New York Times, amazingly, which gives me hope.
Yep, I follow all of those (except Thrace. I will need to look her up! Megan Daum is also great - tho Lisa is my favorite liberal voice in this arena 😊). I just mean the liberal party face on this is a trans activist one....Biden sending out cues. I remain hopeful because I do think sanity will eventually prevail. I also remain hopeful that I can keep my kid from being a casualty in this fight. It’s a very long game though. Liberal media is staying too wishy washy on this. And some are out right promoting lies and false narratives, s.a. it’s only republicans who oppose trans medicine for kids. If we can just get this *discussion* of what is best for our kids out of the political shitsphere, maybe we will have a chance?
Shannon Thrace's memoir, "18 Months" is a great read, although it's not an easy one. The experience she relates there is tough, very tough.
What frustrates me is that right and left feed off each other on this issue. If Oklahoma bans HRT for children, California goes ahead and permits it without parental consent. I dislike both positions, which makes the right call me a groomer and the left call me a bigot. I firmly believe one can be neither one; nuance really is a thing.
Absolutely! I feel the same. Nuance needs its day in the sun! Sanity is just too boring now for the masses who feed off of extremism, I fear. I think more and more people are tiring of extreme partisanship, though. At least that is what I tell myself to keep hanging on.
I just don’t get how the spread of transgender ideology means that people suddenly switch sides on fiscal, universal health, pensions, taxes, etc etc.
Genderism is not a left/right thing. It is an anti-science belief system that is spreading in certain tribal groups. It is highly individualistic, pro-capitalist and anti-feminist. The UK Communist party has come out strongly against it.
In Alberta we don’t care if the liberals tear her apart. The liberals have done everything in their power to shut down our oil and gas industry which pay for a huge part of the federal government. Albertans HATE the liberals. We have no provincial liberal party
I’m so proud to be an Albertan today! Bravo Premier Smith! I grew up in BC and my mom texted me from there today, “Love this - can I vote for Danielle Smith?!” 😊
I encouraged her to send it to her local MP and MLA as a model for similar legislation in BC! I sincerely hope other provinces and states follow Alberta’s lead.
I was born in Alberta and now live in BC, I agree Marie! This province is so insane. My whole life in Alberta I voted NDP but they have completely lost the plot. I now hate them such as the Liberals. Maxime Bernier was the first Canadian politician to stand up and defend Women's Sex Based rights. He actually said those words! Sadly he is maligned far more than Danielle Smith, and his party has no hope of winning. Also, Alberta was one of the first to protect Transexual rights (adults) for teachers in the School act under a conservative Premier, in the 90's I believe. It is not as 'black / white' place as everyone paints it. I suspect she was using 'Transgender Female' to avoid easy attacks.
As another commenter suggested, the right to "alter one's biological sex" isn't even on the table. This language makes the premier appear kind of ignorant.
I have other quibbles with the policies, mainly the requirement for parental approval of any sex-related instruction. I can easily imagine parents who, for religious or other reasons, will keep their children from getting basic information on preventing pregnancy and STDs. Maybe that kind of instruction isn't very effective anyway, but this policy does smack of prudishness rather than child safeguarding. I'd rather leave in the sex ed and do away entirely with any instruction on the unscientific topic of gender.
Also, I don't understand the decision to give 16- and 17-year-olds access to hormonal treatments as long as they're judged to be mature enough. We all know that kids get online coaching in what to say to make sure they get those "life-saving" treatments, including whatever one must say to demonstrate maturity.
Ava, why shouldn't the parents be allowed to keep their children from getting information on preventing pregnancy if that's their values? (To be clear, I don''t hold such religious values myself but I respect the right of parents to instill their values in kids). And yeah, the instructions are crap anyway and often done in a tactless, insensitive way.
I generally think that health services and information should be given to children based on what's in the child's and society's best interest, not based on parent/guardian values or beliefs. Some parents may believe that their child can change sex, or that vaccines cause autism. I don't think those beliefs should interfere with a child being taught that sex is real and immutable or being given vaccines that are known to prevent life-threatening illness.
The basics of sexual reproduction are biological facts that should be taught to all kids at an appropriate age, precisely because some parents may not be comfortable with teaching those facts. (I was happy to let my daughter learn these things in a classroom, where she trusted the information way more than if she'd gotten it from me.) I'll concede that contraception is a contentious topic, but if you're going to teach how babies are made, it makes sense to include some information on how not to make them.
The problem is that activists infiltrate schools. Teachers are also now trained to be activist. Unless parents are actually present for sexual health instruction there is no guarantee this ideology won’t be taught
"What's in the child's best interest" is often a judgment call and generally nobody has a child's best interests like the parents. Sex is a complicated ,emotional topic, it's not like vaccines and healthy eating. Teachers should tread very lightly. I personally think that parents should discuss whatever they believe kids need to know on the subject at the age they think is right. Uncomfortable for both parties? For sure. We should be having uncomfortable conversations with our kids.
This is great, I’m feeling a huge relief to know that (at least a couple of) Canadian government officials are taking this long-overdue, sane approach to children and gender ideology, medicalization, and sports. However it also makes me feel a bit sad because I’m from British Columbia, which always seems to be at political odds with Alberta (Alberta having a long history of being far more conservative than other provinces), and I just hope that other provinces, including those which are far more liberal-leaning (such as BC, Ontario, Quebec) will follow Alberta’s lead with this! Alberta seems to be the only sane province in this country when it comes to these issues! Hopefully Trudeau (whom I now regret that I voted for, btw) doesn’t win the next election, because he’s a big contributor to the insanity around these (and many other) issues in Canada right now. Maybe if things get better up there my daughter and I will move back from the states to Canada one day… But thank god finally some words of sanity coming from the Canadian government!!!
I live in California. This is the most reasonable sane announcement about policy I have yet to hear. If I had a way to send that link to Governor Newsom, who opened up this state to help minors transition, I would. This woman will save many lives.
I would ask can similar broad policies be rolled out in the U.K.? Currently they seem to be disjointed and done by different siloed governments departments.
I am sharing this with my friends in Australia, we can only dream of anything like this there.
We should keep in mind that this is one Canadian province with a population of around 4.5million.
This might be a step in the right direction, but the idea that anyone over 18 is fine to make these decisions is wrong. And blockers and/or hormones (with parental and physician consent) at 17 or 18 is not right. I don't trust that the psychological "experts" will be helping adults to feel comfortable in their bodies. I also wish politicians would stop using the word transgender youth. They are not transgender. They have body dysmorphia and other mental health conditions. The language she is using still acknowledges the myth of the "transgender child or young person" (or adult for that matter). I get that Smith is likely trying to placate the activists, but she is not doing enough to expose the core of this harmful ideology.
Devil advocacy: from a material standpoint you can still think of a "transgender kid" as a kid or youth who actively IDs as trans and is socially or legally transitioned**, which is a group that already does exist around the world.... just like you say "christian kid /adult" and not "christian-identified" for the people who believe in that and read the bible and go to church, even if you know they are not born christian and have no christian gene. They'd still differ from gender dysphoric youth which would be a broader term and include those who are not trans and those who used to be (detrans) too. Squares and rectangles yada yada
**note: social transition means clothes hair pronouns toys makeup body language gender roles basically, legal means documents, neither means medicalization stuff.
This isn't necessarily relevant to this discussion, but as a Canadian living in the US, I object to the headline, "Canadian Sanity ...". Alberta (or Quebec or Nova Scotia) can no more be lumped into "Canada" than New York can accurately represent the US. Politics in Canada is as diverse as it is in the United States and I get tired of fielding questions about "Canada" (from politics to climate to culture etc.) Canada doesn't have the population that the US has, but it is still a large and diverse country!
I'm glad she did this even though it fuels the "This is a right-wing conservative only position" (which it's so not, but the liberals and NDP parties both federal and provincial keep making that claim). I'm frustrated those politicians are reacting in predictable ways when I know they have zero understanding of the issue and only have ears for activists. I'm hopeful this will open conversations about this in Canada. She will get so much backlash but maybe she's the right person to withstand that. I'm one of those progressive liberal types until the gender issue turned me upside down. I would have shrugged her off as "wrong about everything" simply for being conservative but I now have greater tolerance of other views, because of the gender issue. Unfortunately the Trudeau federal liberals will likely throw more money to activist groups as a way to counter her actions. It's so irrational how they think their position is simply the right one when they refuse to actually look at it.
The new policies she laid out seem to come from a place of thoughtful consideration for the health and social well being of children. While not perfect (definitely not perfect), they are a huge step in the right direction. This policy will spare many children from harm, and keep many families intact. I’d jump for joy if a politician in the U.S., perhaps a president or presidential candidate, had the courage to do what she has done, is trying to do.
I forgot to add that New York is doing the COMPLETE OPPOSITE. Who knows more about this? I'll add up top. https://www.votervoice.net/mobile/AUTISMACTION/Campaigns/110786/Respond
Lisa-- I signed and added the following message: "I'm a liberal Upper West Sider and I oppose this bill. I strongly urge you to review the many reasons this is poor public policy and dangerous to our youth, and to reconsider your support. Minors should be given every opportunity to explore gender roles with full parental and community support. But as with deciding to marry, give sexual consent, or buy tobacco or weapons, they do not yet have the maturity to make irrevocable medical decisions they may later regret. Thank you."
Thanks for the heads up, Lisa, and I want to second encouraging folks who write their own letters to pass them on to you. (I don’t have a clear enough handle on how the proposed changes alter the underlying statute to do it myself, or I would mock something up and send it on.) I’m hoping some others may here may be conversant enough with the statute (which I think? in part has to do with the long-standing concept of the “emancipated minor”) to come up with a draft letter.
Thanks for the head's up on this. Here is my response:
This legislation is dangerous and can only cause harm to minors. It has no beneficial aspects. Homeless or parentless (or emancipated) children already can receive medical care provided through Medicaid. This new legislation basically removes parental control or even knowledge of medical treatments (including experimental treatments) performed on their minor children without even a minimum age. The decision whether these children can consent to such medical interventions is left to those performing the services, ignoring motives such as profit, opportunity for experimentation or grandiose notions of "saving the world." This legislation must be rejected.
Lisa, this is way off point, but I see that Joe Burgo has written an interesting piece in Reality’s Last Stand regarding treating men with AGP (as you may well already know, you are quoted in it). I thought it might be interesting to put it out for discussion here or in a chat. Just a thought.
Agree with you. I was amazed on listening to it yesterday, and am also interested in the backstory. I think on the sports aspect, Linda Blades may have been helpful, from a comment someone made. This is a good example of how much better off we would be if folks didn’t view this through a partisan lens. While Smith is conservative politically, from what I see, I thought everything about this, including her empathetic presentation, is a model Ds and Rs alike could and should follow. I did have some question marks on the age limits, but going for perfection right about now is hardly sensible, and the approach she laid out will prevent a lot of harm, if enacted.
Agreed on all points, esp age limits. But, as you said, perfection is the enemy of the good.
I don't know what specifically led to this policy inside the Alberta government, but over the past six months or so several provinces with conservative governments have begun adopting rules about parental notification or consent to change names and pronouns in schools. At the same time the federal Conservative Party is surging in the polls. The federal Conservative Party convention recently adopted policy resolutions calling for limits on hormone therapy and transgender surgery for minors, and protecting women's spaces. So I think there's more room to have these discussions in Canada now than there was a few years ago.
I'm not surprised that Alberta is the first province in Canada to adopt this policy. Alberta has a reputation for being politically conservative and is sometimes called "Canada's Texas", even though it it probably politically closer to a midwestern swing state. They tend to go their own way politically and ignore the orthodoxy coming out of central Canada, as they also did during COVID.
As a democratic socialist i applaud this attempt at clear policy. However a few issues;
1. hormones and blockers 16/17 is still too young to undergo such potential permanent harm including sterilization
2. Alberta needs to work on language: hers is confusing. “Female” is a biological state, not an identity state. So she should refer to “trans identified boys” in sport not “transgender females” - that would be a trans identified girl aka a trans boy or trans man! Confused? That’s the point!
This matters also because as a child identity is not rigid, “trans girl” implies something fixed, wile trans identified male tells us the biologically male child currently identifies as a girl. This language matters, because sex matters
Not a democratic socialist myself, but I agree with number 1 and number 2! No alcohol til age 21, but puberty blockers at 16 (!). And changing name without parental consent -so effectively socially transitioning. Still too young. I think we can quibble about the age-18 vs 21 -but anything under 18 is a no go for me due to the castration/lack of orgasm. It’s just so unethical to take that away before a person fully appreciates what it means to be a sexual adult.
My preference would be 21 for all meds & surgeries related to gender reassignment.
In Canada alcohol at 18 or 19 depending on province...
Smith (the woman in the video) is a conservative politician, she is trying to thread carefully and reach not only the neutral people who have little awareness and/or stakes in this gender stuff, but also those in the opposing side. Using the kind of language you want (TIM, trans identified boy for MTFs and viceversa for FTMs) will immediately spark a mental shutdown in the opposing side which is where arguably most trans youth and gender dysphoric youth lie currently (you know, the people you all allegedly want to hear you and be 'saved' and reach out??) for being an inflammatory "transphobic dogwhistle" and what happens after that? She (Smith) is dismissed and anything she says will not be listened to because she is already branded evil with evil thoughts and sus language. And what happens then? The campaign is a failure and bridging efforts are wasted once again. And if its gonna fail then why bother? Money wasted, time wasted. If people dont want actual tangible bridging and just want to preach to their choir they can just go write a blog or a mini rant on twitter for their pre-aligned followers and call it a day.
Watch the video again, read between the lines and you'll understand Smith is clearly trying to compromise here just like when some politically homeless people use They pronouns for transitioners because they dont want to use she for transwomen and he for transmen (preferring sex-based pronouns instead of gender identity-based pronouns) but also understand that using he for TW and she for TM as default will be taken as problematic and cause immediate thought termination in readers, or worse, bring a storm of derailed discussion about why the writer used the evil pronouns and if the author wants trans people to die instead of whatever THE ACTUAL TOPIC being written about was. Smith and others behind the campaign likely understand that the pre-approved language in those circles is "trans women" (with a space) and "transgender females" not shemales, not transsexuals, not TIMs, not troons, not dysphoric boys, not feminized males, not men pretending to be women. The code is that you refer by what they'd like to be, not what they were born as.
Lisa Davis and Chimamanda Adichie also compromise in language; both women support gender role nonconformity, respect preferred pronouns and names but still see women (females) as distinct from transwomen-transfeminines (mtfs) and men (males) from transmen-transmasculines (ftms) while not seeing transitioners as lesser or evil people, just different demographics of human beings (for Adichie's discussion see: https://youtube.com/watch?v=LBaVveCMXuk&pp=ygUkY2hpbWFtYW5kYSBhZGljaGllIHRyYW5zZ2VuZGVyIHdvbWVu/ at the 15:30 mark). Pro-Trans gender identity believers often think you must see trans women as full women period or else it is assumed you not only want them to "man up and dress down" but also see them as lesser, gross, deserving of mistreatment and point at examples of conservative homophobes as an example of that. Lisa already understands that if she truly wants to paint a broad nonpartisan picture and be heard by more people she has to thread differently from those that do hurt the mixed cluster of GNC-dysphoric-trans youth, and that includes how you word things. A lot of trans-critical people miss this mark and get lost in the echo chambers, with even detransitioners getting bruised in the crossroads (see: https://somenuanceplease.substack.com/p/lets-talk-about-how-we-talk-about )
Yes sex matters, but so does the effectivity and consequences of one's message.
It’s a fair point give the state we are in.
Just fyi this is not me
“you know, the people you all allegedly want to hear you and be 'saved' and reach out??”
Im canadian. This is excellent.
I'm a Canadian as well, don't you find it somewhat surprising when something moderate and sensible come out of there these days?
I'm also Canadian. Every time I see a person I know, virtue signal their support for this ideology, I wonder if they have looked deeply into the issue or if they've bought into the suicide narrative without hearing the counter arguments. They see it as coming from a place of kindness. I have trouble seeing it as kind though, because the long term effects, could potentially be devastating. Have these virtue signalers heard the mounting detransitioner stories? Have they heard about all the countries in Europe adopting a more rational and wait and see approach? Do they understand that under the 'trans' umbrella, there are autogynaphilic men, kids with autism who find gender roles confusing, that girls are more likely to fall into a contagion like this? That list is probably longer than that. I was a person, who was living day to day life, not thinking much on the issue until one day, I saw an influencer (menopausal weightloss), write 'transwomen go through menopause, too". It was just a statement with no follow up answers as to how or why? A virtue signaling statement. I thought, well, how does that work? So it lead me down the rabbit hole of seeking truth. My eyes are wide open. I wonder what makes other people start to question?
Feels like there’s an adult in the room
Getting “backbone” mom vibes 😉neither “jellyfish” nor “brick wall”
Well said.
Danielle smith doesn’t have children, funnily enough
This makes me hopeful that sane and nuanced voices may actually emerge. Thanks for posting this, Lisa!
It does seem very sane. As a Canadian though I know how reviled she is in liberal circles, in liberal media. So unfortunately I don’t think it will do much to De politicize the issue here in Canada
I wish this surprised me! But I do think a sane voice from the conservatives is still an important step. I wish everyone had a conservative approach to medical experimentation on children!!
Sometimes in the US, the messages from the right seem less sane than hers does here, and I worry that those voices just throw tons of fuel on the fire in this country. But it is vexing that such extraordinary sanity is still vilified- the left’s “no debate” impulse on this topic is so prevalent and frustrating!
Be amazed as much as you like but she is depicted as the devil in the media currently and they promise to fight back. I saw in La Presse this morning that people are lawyering up against the policy. There are 3 provinces going that route at this time, and us, in Québec, are disgusted, apparently, which means that my boy could be called a girl at school and I wouldn’t know. Justin will fight back at her.
The thing is: they now have to explicitly defend the indefensible. Explain WHY kids under 15 need to be given drugs that will dissolve their bones and damage their brains and put them at higher risk of cardiac complications. Explain WHY teachers need special secrets with children that are kept from parents.
Before they had the advantage of everything they wanted just being policy that had been ushered through to no publicity and no debate; they didn't have to articulate the tee-ninesiest of defenses of their positions.
Now they are doing the standard dance: "we don't need this law because this stuff isn't even happening! No one is dissolving the bones of children or grooming them at school! But also, if they are, it's a good thing".
All the while requiring parental notification for school trips, team participation, etc....
Justin just publicly denounced Danielle Smith. She is a conservative and therefore, one must stand against everything she says. Her environmental stance is awful, so I guess there is no nuance to be had there.
Justin will lose. This has the support of Albertans
I hope it sticks. That made me wonder what is the policy in Quebec. We don’t hear about trans anything much. My 14 had a friend who’s older brother had someone in his class to talk about trans, but it didn’t spread.
Yesterday, my son who’s 14 could sign to participate in a judo competition without my consent, and I snapped at the coach because we didn’t want him to go. Consent is either everything or nothing.
Danielle Smith is the only politician I've encountered during my lifetime whom I like MORE after she's attained office than I liked when she was running.
She was a bit of a flame-thrower when she was on the sidelines, sort of dumb conservative agitprop stuff. I voted Conservative in the last election (not that it matters in my riding, which in a rigidly NDP university town) because the NDP have lost their damn minds, but I liked Rachel Notley as a person more than I liked Danielle Smith as a person.
but now: I'm ride or die! I'll campaign for her to the ends of the earth, she's done something the national party leader (Pierre Polievre) hasn't come close to having the sand to do. We need more -- men OUT of women's prisons, for example. But this is a real start.
It happened through a local grassroots organization called Take Back Alberta who kind of took over the Governing party’s board. They attended the policy conference and put forward these proposals which were voted on by the party and carried. They have also started getting involved in school trustee elections. They are trying to solve issues locally with citizen participation. There is backlash and name calling of course. Also, I believe fasting and prayer movements help
Needs rewrite. You can't "alter your biological sex." Perhaps "alter your biological sex characteristics" would work. Removing breasts does not alter the biological sex of the woman removing her breasts, but it does alter her secondary sex characteristics. Otherwise, bully for Alberta and its premier.
I of course thought that, too. Concessions?
This is certainly is an outstanding start. I think this is a great template for any leader who needs a direction on how to push back on the current barreling forward of the gender cult. While I understand she couldn’t address every detail in a statement like this, a reminder that parents rights should be the default position would have been good. Also, questioning or disagreeing with the “gender affirming” model is not bullying.
This is sanity. Trans activist already talking about the premier having blood on her hand though. As a Norwegian it' good to see that the woke madness in Canada is meeting resistance. Of course, the new policy is not extreme anti trans in any way, basically return to sanity as we now see in Europe
Wow! How refreshing. I am skeptical that liberals won’t tear this apart and her comments will become political as everything, even unpolitical at the outset, seems to. Yet, I am hopeful! So incredibly sane and compassionate. Love it!
I'm a liberal, and I thought the premier's statement was reasonable, sensible, and well articulated. I agree with most, if not all, of this policy.
Yes, I used to even consider myself a progressive, but not since my kid started down this gender path 5 years ago. I think there are more sane liberals out there than we know. But the liberal political agenda is all in, seemingly, on this trans movement for kids. I have not seen anything yet to disprove this, and so therefore remain “politically homeless”.
If you look to folks like Bari Weiss, Jesse Singal, Shannon Thrace and Carole Hooven, you'll see examples of liberals like me.
Unfortunately, too many in the Democratic Party have signed on to this gender jihad, but I think the worm is turning on that. Gender-critical material is even appearing in the New York Times, amazingly, which gives me hope.
Yep, I follow all of those (except Thrace. I will need to look her up! Megan Daum is also great - tho Lisa is my favorite liberal voice in this arena 😊). I just mean the liberal party face on this is a trans activist one....Biden sending out cues. I remain hopeful because I do think sanity will eventually prevail. I also remain hopeful that I can keep my kid from being a casualty in this fight. It’s a very long game though. Liberal media is staying too wishy washy on this. And some are out right promoting lies and false narratives, s.a. it’s only republicans who oppose trans medicine for kids. If we can just get this *discussion* of what is best for our kids out of the political shitsphere, maybe we will have a chance?
Shannon Thrace's memoir, "18 Months" is a great read, although it's not an easy one. The experience she relates there is tough, very tough.
What frustrates me is that right and left feed off each other on this issue. If Oklahoma bans HRT for children, California goes ahead and permits it without parental consent. I dislike both positions, which makes the right call me a groomer and the left call me a bigot. I firmly believe one can be neither one; nuance really is a thing.
Absolutely! I feel the same. Nuance needs its day in the sun! Sanity is just too boring now for the masses who feed off of extremism, I fear. I think more and more people are tiring of extreme partisanship, though. At least that is what I tell myself to keep hanging on.
I just don’t get how the spread of transgender ideology means that people suddenly switch sides on fiscal, universal health, pensions, taxes, etc etc.
Genderism is not a left/right thing. It is an anti-science belief system that is spreading in certain tribal groups. It is highly individualistic, pro-capitalist and anti-feminist. The UK Communist party has come out strongly against it.
In Alberta we don’t care if the liberals tear her apart. The liberals have done everything in their power to shut down our oil and gas industry which pay for a huge part of the federal government. Albertans HATE the liberals. We have no provincial liberal party
We watch you from British Columbia with envy...or at least I do!
I’m so proud to be an Albertan today! Bravo Premier Smith! I grew up in BC and my mom texted me from there today, “Love this - can I vote for Danielle Smith?!” 😊
I encouraged her to send it to her local MP and MLA as a model for similar legislation in BC! I sincerely hope other provinces and states follow Alberta’s lead.
I was born in Alberta and now live in BC, I agree Marie! This province is so insane. My whole life in Alberta I voted NDP but they have completely lost the plot. I now hate them such as the Liberals. Maxime Bernier was the first Canadian politician to stand up and defend Women's Sex Based rights. He actually said those words! Sadly he is maligned far more than Danielle Smith, and his party has no hope of winning. Also, Alberta was one of the first to protect Transexual rights (adults) for teachers in the School act under a conservative Premier, in the 90's I believe. It is not as 'black / white' place as everyone paints it. I suspect she was using 'Transgender Female' to avoid easy attacks.
This is just so sensible!
I have no previous knowledge of Danielle Smith but she seems impressive.
She is! We love her!
As another commenter suggested, the right to "alter one's biological sex" isn't even on the table. This language makes the premier appear kind of ignorant.
I have other quibbles with the policies, mainly the requirement for parental approval of any sex-related instruction. I can easily imagine parents who, for religious or other reasons, will keep their children from getting basic information on preventing pregnancy and STDs. Maybe that kind of instruction isn't very effective anyway, but this policy does smack of prudishness rather than child safeguarding. I'd rather leave in the sex ed and do away entirely with any instruction on the unscientific topic of gender.
Also, I don't understand the decision to give 16- and 17-year-olds access to hormonal treatments as long as they're judged to be mature enough. We all know that kids get online coaching in what to say to make sure they get those "life-saving" treatments, including whatever one must say to demonstrate maturity.
Ava, why shouldn't the parents be allowed to keep their children from getting information on preventing pregnancy if that's their values? (To be clear, I don''t hold such religious values myself but I respect the right of parents to instill their values in kids). And yeah, the instructions are crap anyway and often done in a tactless, insensitive way.
Please visit Reddit adviceForTeens to learn why teenagers need sex ed:
“I think I’m pregnant”
“I think my girlfriend is pregnant”
“Me and my girlfriend had sex but up pulled out, why is she pregnant”
I don't need to go on Reddit. I've heard similar stories from my daughter about her schoolmates... who've had sex ed. Teens are stupid.
I generally think that health services and information should be given to children based on what's in the child's and society's best interest, not based on parent/guardian values or beliefs. Some parents may believe that their child can change sex, or that vaccines cause autism. I don't think those beliefs should interfere with a child being taught that sex is real and immutable or being given vaccines that are known to prevent life-threatening illness.
The basics of sexual reproduction are biological facts that should be taught to all kids at an appropriate age, precisely because some parents may not be comfortable with teaching those facts. (I was happy to let my daughter learn these things in a classroom, where she trusted the information way more than if she'd gotten it from me.) I'll concede that contraception is a contentious topic, but if you're going to teach how babies are made, it makes sense to include some information on how not to make them.
The problem is that activists infiltrate schools. Teachers are also now trained to be activist. Unless parents are actually present for sexual health instruction there is no guarantee this ideology won’t be taught
Well said, Ava
"What's in the child's best interest" is often a judgment call and generally nobody has a child's best interests like the parents. Sex is a complicated ,emotional topic, it's not like vaccines and healthy eating. Teachers should tread very lightly. I personally think that parents should discuss whatever they believe kids need to know on the subject at the age they think is right. Uncomfortable for both parties? For sure. We should be having uncomfortable conversations with our kids.
As a liberal Democrat in New York, I applaud this voice of reason from Alberta, Canada.
This is great, I’m feeling a huge relief to know that (at least a couple of) Canadian government officials are taking this long-overdue, sane approach to children and gender ideology, medicalization, and sports. However it also makes me feel a bit sad because I’m from British Columbia, which always seems to be at political odds with Alberta (Alberta having a long history of being far more conservative than other provinces), and I just hope that other provinces, including those which are far more liberal-leaning (such as BC, Ontario, Quebec) will follow Alberta’s lead with this! Alberta seems to be the only sane province in this country when it comes to these issues! Hopefully Trudeau (whom I now regret that I voted for, btw) doesn’t win the next election, because he’s a big contributor to the insanity around these (and many other) issues in Canada right now. Maybe if things get better up there my daughter and I will move back from the states to Canada one day… But thank god finally some words of sanity coming from the Canadian government!!!
Thanks 😊
1.6m thumbs ups. You're not the only.
I live in California. This is the most reasonable sane announcement about policy I have yet to hear. If I had a way to send that link to Governor Newsom, who opened up this state to help minors transition, I would. This woman will save many lives.
I would ask can similar broad policies be rolled out in the U.K.? Currently they seem to be disjointed and done by different siloed governments departments.
I am sharing this with my friends in Australia, we can only dream of anything like this there.
We should keep in mind that this is one Canadian province with a population of around 4.5million.
This might be a step in the right direction, but the idea that anyone over 18 is fine to make these decisions is wrong. And blockers and/or hormones (with parental and physician consent) at 17 or 18 is not right. I don't trust that the psychological "experts" will be helping adults to feel comfortable in their bodies. I also wish politicians would stop using the word transgender youth. They are not transgender. They have body dysmorphia and other mental health conditions. The language she is using still acknowledges the myth of the "transgender child or young person" (or adult for that matter). I get that Smith is likely trying to placate the activists, but she is not doing enough to expose the core of this harmful ideology.
Devil advocacy: from a material standpoint you can still think of a "transgender kid" as a kid or youth who actively IDs as trans and is socially or legally transitioned**, which is a group that already does exist around the world.... just like you say "christian kid /adult" and not "christian-identified" for the people who believe in that and read the bible and go to church, even if you know they are not born christian and have no christian gene. They'd still differ from gender dysphoric youth which would be a broader term and include those who are not trans and those who used to be (detrans) too. Squares and rectangles yada yada
**note: social transition means clothes hair pronouns toys makeup body language gender roles basically, legal means documents, neither means medicalization stuff.
Yes yes yes
This isn't necessarily relevant to this discussion, but as a Canadian living in the US, I object to the headline, "Canadian Sanity ...". Alberta (or Quebec or Nova Scotia) can no more be lumped into "Canada" than New York can accurately represent the US. Politics in Canada is as diverse as it is in the United States and I get tired of fielding questions about "Canada" (from politics to climate to culture etc.) Canada doesn't have the population that the US has, but it is still a large and diverse country!
Well, with puberty blockers prohibited until the mid teens we would at least be sacrificing fewer children upon the alter of medical experimentation.
Great piece on this matter.
https://open.substack.com/pub/acceptableviews/p/danielle-smith-rational-reasonable-adult?r=88dyo&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
What a common sense attitude; we need this in England.🏴
I'm glad she did this even though it fuels the "This is a right-wing conservative only position" (which it's so not, but the liberals and NDP parties both federal and provincial keep making that claim). I'm frustrated those politicians are reacting in predictable ways when I know they have zero understanding of the issue and only have ears for activists. I'm hopeful this will open conversations about this in Canada. She will get so much backlash but maybe she's the right person to withstand that. I'm one of those progressive liberal types until the gender issue turned me upside down. I would have shrugged her off as "wrong about everything" simply for being conservative but I now have greater tolerance of other views, because of the gender issue. Unfortunately the Trudeau federal liberals will likely throw more money to activist groups as a way to counter her actions. It's so irrational how they think their position is simply the right one when they refuse to actually look at it.
The new policies she laid out seem to come from a place of thoughtful consideration for the health and social well being of children. While not perfect (definitely not perfect), they are a huge step in the right direction. This policy will spare many children from harm, and keep many families intact. I’d jump for joy if a politician in the U.S., perhaps a president or presidential candidate, had the courage to do what she has done, is trying to do.
Would Eva Kurilova know the backstory?
Interestingly in B.C., next door, they seem to be moving away from parental consent wrt drugs...
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/b-c-plans-to-give-safer-supply-fentanyl-to-minors-and-parents-wont-have-a-say