I have seen various analyses of why our parties have polarized so—the rise of primaries, which may attract fewer median voters; the dying off of the WWII generation, who had fought a common enemy and so were willing to compromise across the aisle; and, of course, the ascendancy of outrage as the primary strategy for attracting attention. For whatever reason, maybe all of these, this is where we are now.
I have never voted for a Republican; however, I am planning to because in my deep blue state it is not only the gender insanity I want to vote against but also the horrendous management of public education, public safety, and tax policies. I am disillusioned by how the “welfare state” has become rife with fraud, with how crime reform has harmed crime victims, and how the tax dollars that I cheerfully paid are too often lining the pockets of the corrupt rather than improving our communities.
Would I be reconsidering my political affiliation if the gender insanity hadn’t tipped me? I doubt it. I would probably have continued to have a basic faith in Democrats doing the right thing. Do I have faith in the current Republican Party? No—I wish people like McCain were back. So, yes, perhaps I am a single issue voter. I will vote against Democrats primarily because I view the gender insanity as a fundamental threat to safety and sanity.
The trans issue is the only one where I skew "right" of the Dems, and it took years of trans activism to get me there. It might get me to at least leave some votes empty next to otherwise safe Dems.
The rest of my politics are still mostly left of the Dems, though they are a mixed bag on governance.
I keep saying I'm not a single-issue voter, either, and I pulled a straight Democratic ticket in the primary here in Texas; however, I am feeling more politically homeless every day. It is impossible to ignore this issue, since popular culture, social media, and news are saturated with it. Women's sex-based rights are a "single issue" about like clean water is a single issue. I may be a Communist, after all - why not - rednecks have been calling me that for years. lol
As a NYC resident, I feel like I have the luxury to vote however I want without it making any difference, since the Democratic candidates will win regardless of what I do. That being said, I don't have anyone I WANT to vote for. It's just, as you note, extremists in each party that rule the day. So do I vote for a Republican who might start a war w/o justification, remove vital programs that truly save lives (unlike so-called gender-affirming care, that harms lives), give even more tax breaks to billionaires who absolutely would not miss an extra 5%, etc., or do I vote for a Democrat who will assure that men are raping women in prisons and stealing female athletes' opportunities, and that more and more young people suffer psychological and medical harm after being brainwashed to believe their perfectly healthy bodies are wrong and must be chemically and surgically altered to appear the opposite sex? Is it even that simple? I don't know - and that's the only thing I know for sure.
It was important to visit the 7th Circle of Hell, and we all need to be thinking a lot more about this problem. Lisa’s to-the-point Unherd essay puts the issue clearly and well: “it’s increasingly likely that there will continue to be two bad choices: Democrats with gender ideology, or Republicans without it.”
One of many things that’s so frustrating about this is, at the grassroots level, polling and surveys (like the recent The Argument poll) show that left-of-center voters are increasingly opposed at least to males in women’s sports and spaces and medicalization of minors. But the voices of those voters are not so far being heard, on many levels.
For example, when Democratic Party overlords like the North Carolina Democratic Party revoke a dissident Democrat’s access to VoteBuilder,” it’s game over. The primaries are a big, big problem, too. Jesse Singal’s superb New York Times Op-Ed noted a study showing that, among all the other problems with primaries, it’s much harder than in a general election to figure out who stands for what. In consequence, as the study states, “primary voters know less than general election voters; difficulty distinguishing candidates from partisan reputations is a likely mechanism. Consistent with group influence, learning endorsements meaningfully affects voter choice. Our findings shed new light on why Congressional candidates fail to converge to the median voter.” All of these things conspire to prevent voters from making their own, independent choices—or having a choice at all.
I also think “it depends” is a big watch-phrase here. For those of us in a bright blue area, as I am, a “protest” vote like a blank ballot or write-in vote is not going to change the outcome. In 2024, while I voted for Harris/Walz (not at all happily, mind you), I employed that approach down ballot and likely will again. What I will not do, even in protest, is vote for a Republican—I’ve not spotted one in my voting lifetime that even remotely shares my values, and it’s worse yet now with the overall obeisance to the current occupant of the White House. In contrast, if I still lived in the Hudson Valley, the equation would have to be different, because my vote actually could count. I would likely vote for whoever is the Democrat in the general election. (Please don’t “at” me. I’m not happy about my choices either!)
For those who feel, as I do, that this current administration and all its enablers have to be removed from office, I think we have no choice but to proceed on two tracks: that is, in voting, we’re going to have to vote for Democrats; in political organizing, we have to keep building support from the ground up until finally, one day, the cultural tide shifts. Some days, I think I will live to see that; most days, I don’t.
Meanwhile, always, I’m so grateful to the two of you for your smart work and big hearts. Good luck with your books, and keep going!
Actually, a write-in campaign might not be a bad idea. Not to win of course (impossible basically), but to raise awareness.
There are no doubt a lot of Democrats who are personally ambivalent about these issues, but never hear a word contrary to the party line. You can't write them a persuasive letter: those are all answered by staff. Any public question demands a public reply that follows the script: deviation from the line will be met with public condemnation from activist groups, or maybe a private sit-down with a group rep, the politician, and the politician's staff, to be followed by public announcements by both sides about how the politician has returned to the correct position. Bottom line is, unless you're in personal contact with one of these politicians as a friend, family member, or staffer, it is almost impossible to pierce the bubble around them on an issue with an established line unless you have the force of a lobbying group behind you.
But maybe, if a write-in candidate started siphoning off votes, few enough to be harmless but enough to suggest coordination, maybe the politician would google that dark horse rival personally. Maybe their name would be a brief mention on the local election news wrap-up. Maybe they'd have a blog that talks about a particular issue from a position that breaks from the party, but makes clear the author is advocating for a reform of the party on this one position. To bring the party in-line with the base.
Lisa Selin Davis, I think I'm nominating you for write-in candidate.
Anyone who wants to vote Democrat, but feels they can't because of genderwang, try it.
Naming Jennifer Sey would not communicate as clearly. She's outspoken on too many issues other than gender, and she's publicly not a Democrat. Lisa basically only talks about gender, has a blog, and is a Democrat. No ambiguity about the issue being raised.
I’ve been trying to make a list of Democrat-ish politicians, writers, activists, and thinkers, etc, who are gender critical, as my “write-in brainstorm list.”
I am as stumped as you are and have no idea who to vote for anymore for any office. As my dad used to say, politics is all knaves and fools. I'm still waiting for anyone to come up with good ideas and ways to implement them. I expect to wait a long time.
IMO, the gender wars are not really a single issue. This ideology leads to actual policy changes in women's spaces, schools, sports, women's prisons, health care etc. We have a SCOTUS that can't define what a female is. That's crazy. How does one rule on issues that directly affect women? This affects all avenues of life and cannot be boiled down to one "issue". I'm going with the party that supports common sense and NOT ideology. To me it's clear who that is.
You're completely right about the breadth of gender ideology's impact, but which party is allegedly free of ideology? Certainly neither Democrats or Republicans are. They both are against women, just in different ways.
Lisa, I'm a partyless conservative who's searching for a home with sane, thoughtful, and passionate Americans who identifies with Rodney King's lament : "can't we all get along?" I'm enjoying some of your thoughts and have subscribed to your blog in hopes I can be challeged to be a better patriot.
I have been told that they accepted money from the Alliance Defending Freedom, an organization that works against the interests of most gay and lesbian Americans. Is it true WoLF took ADF money and, if so, are there any mitigating factors?
I don’t know where they’ve gotten money but I would say at this point it’s pretty hard to find anyone fighting this who’s not deep in the sheets with some of the most frightening far right places you can imagine. I had to distance myself from almost every group because of this
I have seen various analyses of why our parties have polarized so—the rise of primaries, which may attract fewer median voters; the dying off of the WWII generation, who had fought a common enemy and so were willing to compromise across the aisle; and, of course, the ascendancy of outrage as the primary strategy for attracting attention. For whatever reason, maybe all of these, this is where we are now.
I have never voted for a Republican; however, I am planning to because in my deep blue state it is not only the gender insanity I want to vote against but also the horrendous management of public education, public safety, and tax policies. I am disillusioned by how the “welfare state” has become rife with fraud, with how crime reform has harmed crime victims, and how the tax dollars that I cheerfully paid are too often lining the pockets of the corrupt rather than improving our communities.
Would I be reconsidering my political affiliation if the gender insanity hadn’t tipped me? I doubt it. I would probably have continued to have a basic faith in Democrats doing the right thing. Do I have faith in the current Republican Party? No—I wish people like McCain were back. So, yes, perhaps I am a single issue voter. I will vote against Democrats primarily because I view the gender insanity as a fundamental threat to safety and sanity.
The trans issue is the only one where I skew "right" of the Dems, and it took years of trans activism to get me there. It might get me to at least leave some votes empty next to otherwise safe Dems.
The rest of my politics are still mostly left of the Dems, though they are a mixed bag on governance.
In the next presidential election I might write in some gender critical leaders because I'm so furious with the Democrats.
I am of your mind as well.
I keep saying I'm not a single-issue voter, either, and I pulled a straight Democratic ticket in the primary here in Texas; however, I am feeling more politically homeless every day. It is impossible to ignore this issue, since popular culture, social media, and news are saturated with it. Women's sex-based rights are a "single issue" about like clean water is a single issue. I may be a Communist, after all - why not - rednecks have been calling me that for years. lol
As a NYC resident, I feel like I have the luxury to vote however I want without it making any difference, since the Democratic candidates will win regardless of what I do. That being said, I don't have anyone I WANT to vote for. It's just, as you note, extremists in each party that rule the day. So do I vote for a Republican who might start a war w/o justification, remove vital programs that truly save lives (unlike so-called gender-affirming care, that harms lives), give even more tax breaks to billionaires who absolutely would not miss an extra 5%, etc., or do I vote for a Democrat who will assure that men are raping women in prisons and stealing female athletes' opportunities, and that more and more young people suffer psychological and medical harm after being brainwashed to believe their perfectly healthy bodies are wrong and must be chemically and surgically altered to appear the opposite sex? Is it even that simple? I don't know - and that's the only thing I know for sure.
It was important to visit the 7th Circle of Hell, and we all need to be thinking a lot more about this problem. Lisa’s to-the-point Unherd essay puts the issue clearly and well: “it’s increasingly likely that there will continue to be two bad choices: Democrats with gender ideology, or Republicans without it.”
One of many things that’s so frustrating about this is, at the grassroots level, polling and surveys (like the recent The Argument poll) show that left-of-center voters are increasingly opposed at least to males in women’s sports and spaces and medicalization of minors. But the voices of those voters are not so far being heard, on many levels.
For example, when Democratic Party overlords like the North Carolina Democratic Party revoke a dissident Democrat’s access to VoteBuilder,” it’s game over. The primaries are a big, big problem, too. Jesse Singal’s superb New York Times Op-Ed noted a study showing that, among all the other problems with primaries, it’s much harder than in a general election to figure out who stands for what. In consequence, as the study states, “primary voters know less than general election voters; difficulty distinguishing candidates from partisan reputations is a likely mechanism. Consistent with group influence, learning endorsements meaningfully affects voter choice. Our findings shed new light on why Congressional candidates fail to converge to the median voter.” All of these things conspire to prevent voters from making their own, independent choices—or having a choice at all.
I also think “it depends” is a big watch-phrase here. For those of us in a bright blue area, as I am, a “protest” vote like a blank ballot or write-in vote is not going to change the outcome. In 2024, while I voted for Harris/Walz (not at all happily, mind you), I employed that approach down ballot and likely will again. What I will not do, even in protest, is vote for a Republican—I’ve not spotted one in my voting lifetime that even remotely shares my values, and it’s worse yet now with the overall obeisance to the current occupant of the White House. In contrast, if I still lived in the Hudson Valley, the equation would have to be different, because my vote actually could count. I would likely vote for whoever is the Democrat in the general election. (Please don’t “at” me. I’m not happy about my choices either!)
For those who feel, as I do, that this current administration and all its enablers have to be removed from office, I think we have no choice but to proceed on two tracks: that is, in voting, we’re going to have to vote for Democrats; in political organizing, we have to keep building support from the ground up until finally, one day, the cultural tide shifts. Some days, I think I will live to see that; most days, I don’t.
Meanwhile, always, I’m so grateful to the two of you for your smart work and big hearts. Good luck with your books, and keep going!
Actually, a write-in campaign might not be a bad idea. Not to win of course (impossible basically), but to raise awareness.
There are no doubt a lot of Democrats who are personally ambivalent about these issues, but never hear a word contrary to the party line. You can't write them a persuasive letter: those are all answered by staff. Any public question demands a public reply that follows the script: deviation from the line will be met with public condemnation from activist groups, or maybe a private sit-down with a group rep, the politician, and the politician's staff, to be followed by public announcements by both sides about how the politician has returned to the correct position. Bottom line is, unless you're in personal contact with one of these politicians as a friend, family member, or staffer, it is almost impossible to pierce the bubble around them on an issue with an established line unless you have the force of a lobbying group behind you.
But maybe, if a write-in candidate started siphoning off votes, few enough to be harmless but enough to suggest coordination, maybe the politician would google that dark horse rival personally. Maybe their name would be a brief mention on the local election news wrap-up. Maybe they'd have a blog that talks about a particular issue from a position that breaks from the party, but makes clear the author is advocating for a reform of the party on this one position. To bring the party in-line with the base.
Lisa Selin Davis, I think I'm nominating you for write-in candidate.
Anyone who wants to vote Democrat, but feels they can't because of genderwang, try it.
I was thinking maybe Lisa paired with Jennifer Sey.
Naming Jennifer Sey would not communicate as clearly. She's outspoken on too many issues other than gender, and she's publicly not a Democrat. Lisa basically only talks about gender, has a blog, and is a Democrat. No ambiguity about the issue being raised.
Ok. Who else? Who's Lisa's running mate? I want ideas...
Maybe Jamie Reed, if you need a second name.
I’ve been trying to make a list of Democrat-ish politicians, writers, activists, and thinkers, etc, who are gender critical, as my “write-in brainstorm list.”
I am as stumped as you are and have no idea who to vote for anymore for any office. As my dad used to say, politics is all knaves and fools. I'm still waiting for anyone to come up with good ideas and ways to implement them. I expect to wait a long time.
IMO, the gender wars are not really a single issue. This ideology leads to actual policy changes in women's spaces, schools, sports, women's prisons, health care etc. We have a SCOTUS that can't define what a female is. That's crazy. How does one rule on issues that directly affect women? This affects all avenues of life and cannot be boiled down to one "issue". I'm going with the party that supports common sense and NOT ideology. To me it's clear who that is.
You're completely right about the breadth of gender ideology's impact, but which party is allegedly free of ideology? Certainly neither Democrats or Republicans are. They both are against women, just in different ways.
What can you do? Write in Janice Raymond?
I don't really know who's free of gender ideology but hands down, imo, Republicans are on the side of protecting women. It's a no brainer in my mind.
Agree wholeheartedly! It will affect EVERYTHING.
Lisa, I'm a partyless conservative who's searching for a home with sane, thoughtful, and passionate Americans who identifies with Rodney King's lament : "can't we all get along?" I'm enjoying some of your thoughts and have subscribed to your blog in hopes I can be challeged to be a better patriot.
I love this! I’m personally insane and thoughtless but professionally the opposite. Who else have you found?
We can make our position heard to the ones who are elected.
Is WoLF (Women's Liberation Front) a safe ally or not? This is a serious question.
What would make them “unsafe?”
I have been told that they accepted money from the Alliance Defending Freedom, an organization that works against the interests of most gay and lesbian Americans. Is it true WoLF took ADF money and, if so, are there any mitigating factors?
I don’t know where they’ve gotten money but I would say at this point it’s pretty hard to find anyone fighting this who’s not deep in the sheets with some of the most frightening far right places you can imagine. I had to distance myself from almost every group because of this
Can't fight chemistry and hormones . Obviously in the future the science will be easier.
Are you also against test tube created babies ?
I think we're going to see young conservatives as cooler for a while. But who knows?!
My *loyalty* to the Democrats is rooted in Republican policy, speech, and practice. That's not going loyalty at all, but it has the same effect.