I get it, you all hate Newsom. And the other Dems that stepped out of line have stepped back. But grievance and cynicism doesn't help. I'm just saying: tell them they did the right thing. Show them. How else will anyone create paths for other Dems to follow?
I am a lifelong Democrat who has also been for some years out of alignment with the party regarding norms, policies, and laws which elevate gender identity over sex. The results have been disastrous for women, and also young people and children.
I write to thank you for taking a public stand supporting fairness for women in sports. It's well past time for Democrats to wake up to the damage done to women in the name of "inclusiveness." You are right, it is not fair. Anyone can see this. Sometimes common sense is correct. I know you have taken political flack for this stance, but many of us very much appreciate this coming from you.
I also write to ask that you reconsider your public stance about medicalization of minors who wish to appear as the opposite sex or as no sex. Humans cannot change sex, and there are only two sexes. Children cannot consent to these dangerous procedures. Children should not be taught in schools that there is any option to be other than the sex they were born. There is growing evidence of life-long harm caused and, as you surely know, other countries are pulling back from this practice.
Finally, I ask that as a leader in the Democratic party you work to put an end to incarcerated women being forced to be housed with biological males. This too is simply and plainly wrong. I correspond with woman in a California prison who is deeply traumatized by being housed with males, a result of the bill California enacted enabling any male who identifies as a female to be housed with women. Please change this, be a leader. Admit you were wrong for signing this bill into law. Accountability would go a long way with voters like me.
Democrats are supposed to stand for the most vulnerable. Please continue to do the right thing, even if it is not popular.
I just saw your letter today, somehow! I wish we had a way to “bank” and circulate sample texts like this more efficiently. (I passed on language a fellow in CA used that I thought useful.) While I think Lisa is right that complaining alone is not productive, at the same time, it’s important, particularly in a case like Newsom’s, to retain a good bit of skepticism, given the serious problems in his own state that he has helped create, then failed to address, and also has failed and continues to fail even to listen to those in the state who have tried repeatedly to get his ear. While I myself judged that, under these circumstances, it was premature to thank Newsom, I do appreciate how your letter diplomatically handles this, including noting the problems. It’s definitely a valid approach.
Thanks for thinking about this and responding Susan. In my view, there are many valid approaches, and we can't or won't all take the same one for many reasons, including our personal feelings and boundaries. Me, I couldn't thank him without pushing him on the places he has failed. Someone else could have sent a sweet thank you card in the mail, and that is fine. I wanted to be polite but not warm as I am very unhappy with so much he has done. I also used to be a Democratic staffer, so I am also aware that excessive emotional language harms any cause. Even though my email will never be read by him and just thrown into a tally, that tally still matters...and you never know if that intern whose job it is to deal with it MIGHT actually read it all the way through....and it might affect her. My belief is that we should all keep communicating, privately or publicly, and that we should be supporting the people most harmed by this ideology and those on the front lines fighting it in public. If I was a woman incarcerated in California with men, I could not thank Newsom. If I was a parent whose child had been harmed because of state policies supporting gender ideology, I could not thank him. We all have to find our own way.
Thank you! One of my small ways of trying to make a difference is by commenting on Substacks like Lisa's, so it means a lot to me that you found value in what I offered. Another piece of my philosophy is that I believe it matters as much to connect authentically to just one person about this (or any other) important topic as it does to dozens or thousands. We are all floating in the same cultural sea, and you never know how we can affect the outcome of things through communications on any scale. We may never even know or get credit, and that doesn't matter either. Good connecting with you. Be well! ❤️
hi! i think sending letters is a very good idea. it's harder for people to ignore physical letters than emails. but it's not that hard to ignore a physical letter. i don't pick up my mail for many months, at times.
now, they probably don't do that. but regular letters are just letters. letter, meh. letters don't scare people.
you know what scares people? certified mail. registered mail. certified mail is something you have to deal with. if you get certified mail you aren't expecting, that's bad. bad bad. lawsuit bad. irs bad. i would know. don't ask. it's fine.
now, anyone can send certified mail. it costs two bucks. but when you send certified mail, it scares people. they think, oh, god, what is this? am i getting sued? am i getting audited?
they open the letter in absolute dread. no, they're not getting sued. they're not getting audited. they're just telling you they have a problem with you. they maybe breathe a sigh of relief. they maybe say, okay, well, this isn't a lawsuit, it isn't the irs. but they thought it was! they read your letter in *absolute dread.* that means they actually read it, not just scan it. they really read it, with their brain on. this is big!
plus, if they're smart, maybe they think, who sends certified mail? why did they send certified mail?
well, certified mail gets you a receipt. you know it was delivered. you know they received it. and you know when. you have tracking. you have records.
if they don't respond, send another a week later. it'll cost another two bucks. you can write, simply, in that second letter, "greetings. i see that you received my letter on such and such a date. it has now been a week since you received my letter, and i have not received any response. in case you received, but did not read, my letter, or someone in your office misplaced it, here is another copy. i hope that you will respond to this letter, because i want to know what you think on these issues. thank you."
this will get that entire office talking. who is the guy? why is he sending certified mail? why does he want a record? if anyone in that office is smart, they will wonder if maybe you are a lawyer. you're not, but they will wonder. or maybe you just want records, because records are useful for lots of things. records are useful in court. *very* useful. records are useful in politics. lots of things! and they don't know why you want a record. they don't know what you're planning.
maybe they respond. maybe they don't. send another if you like. but the fun thing with certified mail is, no one can ignore certified mail. it *could* be the irs. they *could* be getting sued. they can't ignore it. it's terrifying every time.
being able to send certified mail for two bucks is basically like being allowed to send someone to blast an air horn outside their window, and deliver your message through a loudspeaker. i would do this myself, but i don't presently have two bucks to send such a letter as you did via certified mail to every state's doctors' association. well, actually, that's two bucks times fifty states, that's a hundred bucks -- i do have that, but that's basically all i have.
but there are also things you can do for free. either right now, or after you send the certified mail, you can call the california doctos' association at 800) 786-4262 as many times as you like, asking why they haven't responded to your letter. this is called 'givin' 'em hell." it's extremely fun, for me. not for everybody, but whatever.
if they hang up on you, which they well might, you can go to 1201 K Street, Suite #800, Sacramento, CA 95814, and knock on the door, and ask them why haven't responded to your letter. they may close the door in your face. knock again! knocking isn't a crime. keep knocking. what can they do about knocking? maybe they call the police. tell them all you want is a response to your letter. the police will say, okay, folks, we have a problem here, but it's not that big of a problem. how about you guys respond to this guy's letter, and then if he keeps knocking after that, you call me, because that's harassment. *then* you can see if they respond to your letter. maybe they will, maybe they won't. maybe you can't get to sacramento. but i know one thing for sure: this is a way to have a lot of fun, even with just a phone and two bucks. and by "fun" i mean a chance to yell at some fucking fucking fucking moron who is sitting in an office not deal with the fucking things he or she is supposed to be fucking dealing with, like not fucking castrating children who say they're confused and calling that fucking medicine. now, i would do this, and i guess i could in my state, or yours, or all of them, since what's my hundred bucks compared to that, but i'm strategic, and i know i maybe shouldn't, because that's how i would describe the situation, and that wouldn't be strategic. you seem nice. your letter was probably polite. mine would not be. they ought to respond to your letter, because if they don't, they will start getting letters from me. and if people don't respond to my letters, i find out why. if you need me to lend you the two bucks for the certified letter, you can give me, either here or by direct message, an email to which i can send funds via paypal, and then you will have the two bucks, and you can do it, and you can pay me back whenever you feel like it, or never. keep fighting the good fight!
100% agree. It doesn't matter if we don't like him or what he's done in the past, which nobody does who follows gender legislation. We don't have to vote for him or give him a Nobel prize or forget the damage he has done, but this behavior should be encouraged--for political reasons, to make more space for others to follow. It doesn't all feel good all the time. We seem to have an idea in this country that we need to be 100% behind which politicians we choose to support. What a luxury that is, and it is not strategic either. It's also an illusion that any politician is perfect. I don't think he is either brave or wonderful, but I think it is wonderful that he made this public shift. I will let him know.
Now, unlike that creature there, Gavin Newsom merely *metaphorically* has no spine.
Yet, also unlike that creature there, Gavin Newsom presumably has at least some capacity to remember his own past words and actions.
We have video and twitter-history evidence of him saying things that he now says he did not say, on several subjects.
Thus we may conclude, quite firmly, that he is not merely spineless, but is in fact a dirty liar.
As the creature above, at the very least, cannot lie, and further, at least to me, appears quite clean, I can sincerely say that I would vote for that creature for President over Gavin Newsom.
(For the lower spot on the ticket, maybe Mr Krabs?)
I just try to say that Newsome was too chicken shit/politically self-serving to say the right thing when the tide was completely Queer, and now that that tide is somewhat subsiding, he can say what's actually right, even if just for his own political gain, but it is still a correct position and should be seen as such no matter who is saying it and why they are saying it.
I don't have the time or patience to look up the details, but hasn't Newsome signed some pretty far out laws enacting the most advanced points of the trans agenda? What sticks in my mind is a law allowing CPS to declare a child "abused or neglected" and remove him from the home if parents refuse their consent to sex change treatments the kid wants?
Agree with this completely. Unless and until he cleans up his own state, I have no time for another opportunistic bit of talk like his. Same goes for Suozzi and Moulton.
"How do we create an environment in which these ideas about gender can be discussed and debated, without risking careers or livelihoods? How do we make it safe for people to speak up, to ask about pronouns, gender identity, youth gender medicine"
You are doing it!
You and the others like you are giving us more and more facts, explanations, viewpoints, etc. maybe you need to get a breather right now but it is turning. We have to keep pushing. There is a delay but it is happening.
The way you are being deplatformed is absolutely outrageous, but please know you are nonetheless incredibly helpful to everyone who is trying to break through the wall of silence.
Reminds me of this zinger by Lydia Polgreen. Lydia attended the Genspect conference in Denver in November of 2023.
Her piece in NYT: She compares her decision not to try out for the swim team in sixth grade (regrets!) to young people eventually regretting their life-altering decisions to take hormones and undergo “gender-affirming surgeries.”
Also, here's a sampling from my watching Republicans that gives me some hope too . . . Here's a point in the video where Republican Dan Crenshaw (TX) answers a question from the audience about "the transgenders":
What I find remarkable in this video is this culturally conservative Republican talking like this: " there's a gay community too that's just like 'We don't . . . well, we're not part of this. We're just trying to live our lives, you know. We don't . . . we're not trying to do all the weird stuff and things with kids -- like that's not us!' and they get very offended by it -- and rightfully so! They're just people trying to live their lives."
Listened to the latest excellent Informed Dissent yesterday where you all discussed this juncture we are at, where it is even harder than ever for us in the liberal camp to talk to Democrats. Yeah, it feels almost impossible right now. The main piece of hope I have is that things keep changing, so this will change too, maybe sooner than later. YOU are changing it, as you have from the beginning. Conversations must keep happening, and the private ones are at least as important as the public ones. Unctuous as Gavin's hair or personality is (let's just say both), I applaud him and any and all Democrats shifting. The best thing about the story of Gavin "standing up" for women is that it is very unlikely courage that inspired him. He is more likely reading the room and the political tea leaves. His oily self does not matter. To me, it indicates change is happening in the back channels. The guy has the phone numbers of billionaires on his phone, he sure does. In a post-Citizen's United world, it's all about the funding, for all politics. Thanks Lisa!
I’m not a fan of Newsom . I don’t see him as a Blue Dog(I happen to be one myself) and to me dating all the way back to 2004, he’s shown himself to be completely inauthentic and only out for his own Self Interests. Meanwhile, Beto O’Rourke has done the opposite and has shown himself to blunt, fearless and fully authentic. Also, As a California bred Texan, I Never liked Newsom.
Cynical libertarian-oriented person that I am, upon listening to that speech, I could not help but feel a gush of unabashed affection for that beautiful man, Jonah Wheeler.
I also listen to UnderCurrents whenever commentator Emily Jashinsky interviews a "lefty," in hopes of hearing about signs that the regime of zealots are losing their hold on what is supposed to be Trump's "loyal opposition." Perhaps the following is one more piece of evidence that things are about to change in the Democratic Party? Jashinsky has recently interviewed a well-established journalist, David Weigel, who has covered the Bernie Sanders-related political events over the years. Jashinsky has more conservative leanings, but (in the spirit of the U.K. based show, UnHerd) she often airs the perspectives and nuance of political forces that are left-leaning too. In this episode, there is discussion of the signs that rank and file Democrats are starting to reject the old guard in the party in a way that both she and Weigel agree seem similar to the Tea Party Movement that attempted to revamp the Republicans in the past, before Trump blew in and turned it MAGA.
This is not directly related to the issue of "trans" and how the leadership of the Democratic party have so stubbornly and myopically clung to the increasingly discredited trans activist narratives. But I think it is one more piece of evidence that the Party's current lockstep alignment with fringe ideologies, even when polling indicates "Woke" policy doesn't enjoy majority support, continues to piss off a lot of left-leaning voters and distracts from bread and butter concerns . . . It may be that, just as a whole lot of voters indulged their desire for their own "berzerker" to disrupt all those (cue Jesus story from Bible) "money changers in the Temple," a similar populist wave is finally building up before the Democratic establishment.
Voters are looking for "the craziest son of a bitch in the race."
There is an insight first made by Republican Rep. Massie to explain voters' attraction to Trump, and in this interview Jashinsky refers to it repeatedly regarding the rallies that Bernie Sanders is having: see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jufwz0BrpBM
On Newsom, I think it’s really important not to give praise that is not yet due. We have already been burned once on that with Suozzi and Moulton, with many of us reaching out to thank them for speaking up only to have them go ahead and vote vs. HR28. Similarly, with Newsom, I see his talk as hollow. His state is among the most egregious, as we know, and he has neither said nor done anything to change that so far. For example, I understand that there are now two bills pending on which he could “do a Wheeler” and speak up in support of them. So far as I know, he has said nothing. So, as of yet, I don’t think there is any basis on which to see him as praiseworthy, let alone an ally in this fight. The criticisms of him I have seen from sex-realists are valid and should not be disparaged.
Good for Newsom to speak up (a little bit) on this, and doing podcasts with people with whom he disagrees, but in my view his reputation is unrecoverable. What he did during Covid, keeping California public school kids out of school for a year and a half while sending his own to an open private, is inexcusable, and I will never be able to see him as anything but a slimy, self-serving hypocrite. I really hope he is not the Democratic candidate in 2028.
Both pretty darn Unctuous, in my book! (He was, briefly, my neighbor, so this is an up-close view! ;). Tho I do appreciate his - and other Dems - willingness to treat this complex topic with the nuance it deserves!
Maybe because the graphic from the NBC poll shows only the opinions of white voters (by sex and education level)? And so, to say “everyone” hates the Democrats implies that white voters are “everyone.” Which of course they are not. But (according to the original NBC story) they are 71% of the electorate.
Ideally “we” - as in any of us who speak out at all - should be thanking Newsom for finally saying something true and helpful, while also reminding him that he has caused untold suffering and had better walk back his destructive, homophobic, insane policies regarding children and teens and social and medical transition - NOW. It should be possible to encourage good behavior and also plead for more of it and roundly criticize his prior actions. Right?
I see. The NBC poll was pretty specific about why they were using only this data to demonstrate the growing political gulf between men and women of this racial cohort but I can see why using the term 'everyone' by our host is not accurate. Good catch.
I can’t take the credit for the original catch — that was the commenter to whom you were responding. And it looks like our host has indeed adjusted accordingly.
I get it, you all hate Newsom. And the other Dems that stepped out of line have stepped back. But grievance and cynicism doesn't help. I'm just saying: tell them they did the right thing. Show them. How else will anyone create paths for other Dems to follow?
Here is a way to say thanks to Governor Newsom.
https://www.gov.ca.gov/contact/
This is what I wrote, in case helpful to anyone:
I am a lifelong Democrat who has also been for some years out of alignment with the party regarding norms, policies, and laws which elevate gender identity over sex. The results have been disastrous for women, and also young people and children.
I write to thank you for taking a public stand supporting fairness for women in sports. It's well past time for Democrats to wake up to the damage done to women in the name of "inclusiveness." You are right, it is not fair. Anyone can see this. Sometimes common sense is correct. I know you have taken political flack for this stance, but many of us very much appreciate this coming from you.
I also write to ask that you reconsider your public stance about medicalization of minors who wish to appear as the opposite sex or as no sex. Humans cannot change sex, and there are only two sexes. Children cannot consent to these dangerous procedures. Children should not be taught in schools that there is any option to be other than the sex they were born. There is growing evidence of life-long harm caused and, as you surely know, other countries are pulling back from this practice.
Finally, I ask that as a leader in the Democratic party you work to put an end to incarcerated women being forced to be housed with biological males. This too is simply and plainly wrong. I correspond with woman in a California prison who is deeply traumatized by being housed with males, a result of the bill California enacted enabling any male who identifies as a female to be housed with women. Please change this, be a leader. Admit you were wrong for signing this bill into law. Accountability would go a long way with voters like me.
Democrats are supposed to stand for the most vulnerable. Please continue to do the right thing, even if it is not popular.
I just saw your letter today, somehow! I wish we had a way to “bank” and circulate sample texts like this more efficiently. (I passed on language a fellow in CA used that I thought useful.) While I think Lisa is right that complaining alone is not productive, at the same time, it’s important, particularly in a case like Newsom’s, to retain a good bit of skepticism, given the serious problems in his own state that he has helped create, then failed to address, and also has failed and continues to fail even to listen to those in the state who have tried repeatedly to get his ear. While I myself judged that, under these circumstances, it was premature to thank Newsom, I do appreciate how your letter diplomatically handles this, including noting the problems. It’s definitely a valid approach.
Thanks for thinking about this and responding Susan. In my view, there are many valid approaches, and we can't or won't all take the same one for many reasons, including our personal feelings and boundaries. Me, I couldn't thank him without pushing him on the places he has failed. Someone else could have sent a sweet thank you card in the mail, and that is fine. I wanted to be polite but not warm as I am very unhappy with so much he has done. I also used to be a Democratic staffer, so I am also aware that excessive emotional language harms any cause. Even though my email will never be read by him and just thrown into a tally, that tally still matters...and you never know if that intern whose job it is to deal with it MIGHT actually read it all the way through....and it might affect her. My belief is that we should all keep communicating, privately or publicly, and that we should be supporting the people most harmed by this ideology and those on the front lines fighting it in public. If I was a woman incarcerated in California with men, I could not thank Newsom. If I was a parent whose child had been harmed because of state policies supporting gender ideology, I could not thank him. We all have to find our own way.
What you’ve written here is so smart, so thoughtful, and such incredibly good advice. Thank you.
Thank you! One of my small ways of trying to make a difference is by commenting on Substacks like Lisa's, so it means a lot to me that you found value in what I offered. Another piece of my philosophy is that I believe it matters as much to connect authentically to just one person about this (or any other) important topic as it does to dozens or thousands. We are all floating in the same cultural sea, and you never know how we can affect the outcome of things through communications on any scale. We may never even know or get credit, and that doesn't matter either. Good connecting with you. Be well! ❤️
Oh, wow, you have my heart with this. So, so, so real and true.❤️
hi! i think sending letters is a very good idea. it's harder for people to ignore physical letters than emails. but it's not that hard to ignore a physical letter. i don't pick up my mail for many months, at times.
now, they probably don't do that. but regular letters are just letters. letter, meh. letters don't scare people.
you know what scares people? certified mail. registered mail. certified mail is something you have to deal with. if you get certified mail you aren't expecting, that's bad. bad bad. lawsuit bad. irs bad. i would know. don't ask. it's fine.
now, anyone can send certified mail. it costs two bucks. but when you send certified mail, it scares people. they think, oh, god, what is this? am i getting sued? am i getting audited?
they open the letter in absolute dread. no, they're not getting sued. they're not getting audited. they're just telling you they have a problem with you. they maybe breathe a sigh of relief. they maybe say, okay, well, this isn't a lawsuit, it isn't the irs. but they thought it was! they read your letter in *absolute dread.* that means they actually read it, not just scan it. they really read it, with their brain on. this is big!
plus, if they're smart, maybe they think, who sends certified mail? why did they send certified mail?
well, certified mail gets you a receipt. you know it was delivered. you know they received it. and you know when. you have tracking. you have records.
if they don't respond, send another a week later. it'll cost another two bucks. you can write, simply, in that second letter, "greetings. i see that you received my letter on such and such a date. it has now been a week since you received my letter, and i have not received any response. in case you received, but did not read, my letter, or someone in your office misplaced it, here is another copy. i hope that you will respond to this letter, because i want to know what you think on these issues. thank you."
this will get that entire office talking. who is the guy? why is he sending certified mail? why does he want a record? if anyone in that office is smart, they will wonder if maybe you are a lawyer. you're not, but they will wonder. or maybe you just want records, because records are useful for lots of things. records are useful in court. *very* useful. records are useful in politics. lots of things! and they don't know why you want a record. they don't know what you're planning.
maybe they respond. maybe they don't. send another if you like. but the fun thing with certified mail is, no one can ignore certified mail. it *could* be the irs. they *could* be getting sued. they can't ignore it. it's terrifying every time.
being able to send certified mail for two bucks is basically like being allowed to send someone to blast an air horn outside their window, and deliver your message through a loudspeaker. i would do this myself, but i don't presently have two bucks to send such a letter as you did via certified mail to every state's doctors' association. well, actually, that's two bucks times fifty states, that's a hundred bucks -- i do have that, but that's basically all i have.
but there are also things you can do for free. either right now, or after you send the certified mail, you can call the california doctos' association at 800) 786-4262 as many times as you like, asking why they haven't responded to your letter. this is called 'givin' 'em hell." it's extremely fun, for me. not for everybody, but whatever.
if they hang up on you, which they well might, you can go to 1201 K Street, Suite #800, Sacramento, CA 95814, and knock on the door, and ask them why haven't responded to your letter. they may close the door in your face. knock again! knocking isn't a crime. keep knocking. what can they do about knocking? maybe they call the police. tell them all you want is a response to your letter. the police will say, okay, folks, we have a problem here, but it's not that big of a problem. how about you guys respond to this guy's letter, and then if he keeps knocking after that, you call me, because that's harassment. *then* you can see if they respond to your letter. maybe they will, maybe they won't. maybe you can't get to sacramento. but i know one thing for sure: this is a way to have a lot of fun, even with just a phone and two bucks. and by "fun" i mean a chance to yell at some fucking fucking fucking moron who is sitting in an office not deal with the fucking things he or she is supposed to be fucking dealing with, like not fucking castrating children who say they're confused and calling that fucking medicine. now, i would do this, and i guess i could in my state, or yours, or all of them, since what's my hundred bucks compared to that, but i'm strategic, and i know i maybe shouldn't, because that's how i would describe the situation, and that wouldn't be strategic. you seem nice. your letter was probably polite. mine would not be. they ought to respond to your letter, because if they don't, they will start getting letters from me. and if people don't respond to my letters, i find out why. if you need me to lend you the two bucks for the certified letter, you can give me, either here or by direct message, an email to which i can send funds via paypal, and then you will have the two bucks, and you can do it, and you can pay me back whenever you feel like it, or never. keep fighting the good fight!
100% agree. It doesn't matter if we don't like him or what he's done in the past, which nobody does who follows gender legislation. We don't have to vote for him or give him a Nobel prize or forget the damage he has done, but this behavior should be encouraged--for political reasons, to make more space for others to follow. It doesn't all feel good all the time. We seem to have an idea in this country that we need to be 100% behind which politicians we choose to support. What a luxury that is, and it is not strategic either. It's also an illusion that any politician is perfect. I don't think he is either brave or wonderful, but I think it is wonderful that he made this public shift. I will let him know.
I, for one, don't hate him. I just think his latest movement is best represented by this gif:
https://64.media.tumblr.com/9aa6c5926947a211a66a7dcfe975d317/249422d21349de9a-eb/s640x960/c3df4768e31f10063101891eee5d5fd566a62edc.gifv
Now, unlike that creature there, Gavin Newsom merely *metaphorically* has no spine.
Yet, also unlike that creature there, Gavin Newsom presumably has at least some capacity to remember his own past words and actions.
We have video and twitter-history evidence of him saying things that he now says he did not say, on several subjects.
Thus we may conclude, quite firmly, that he is not merely spineless, but is in fact a dirty liar.
As the creature above, at the very least, cannot lie, and further, at least to me, appears quite clean, I can sincerely say that I would vote for that creature for President over Gavin Newsom.
(For the lower spot on the ticket, maybe Mr Krabs?)
I just try to say that Newsome was too chicken shit/politically self-serving to say the right thing when the tide was completely Queer, and now that that tide is somewhat subsiding, he can say what's actually right, even if just for his own political gain, but it is still a correct position and should be seen as such no matter who is saying it and why they are saying it.
I don't have the time or patience to look up the details, but hasn't Newsome signed some pretty far out laws enacting the most advanced points of the trans agenda? What sticks in my mind is a law allowing CPS to declare a child "abused or neglected" and remove him from the home if parents refuse their consent to sex change treatments the kid wants?
He has signed such bills, and so far no indication he plans to take any action to undo them. So no pom-poms for Newsom till that changes.
Agree with this completely. Unless and until he cleans up his own state, I have no time for another opportunistic bit of talk like his. Same goes for Suozzi and Moulton.
I found this on a conservative news site. Newsom is not backing down on the trans policies. He is only on the side of fairness in female sports.
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/newsom-defends-californias-transgender-policies-when-confronted-by-bill-maher/
"How do we create an environment in which these ideas about gender can be discussed and debated, without risking careers or livelihoods? How do we make it safe for people to speak up, to ask about pronouns, gender identity, youth gender medicine"
You are doing it!
You and the others like you are giving us more and more facts, explanations, viewpoints, etc. maybe you need to get a breather right now but it is turning. We have to keep pushing. There is a delay but it is happening.
Except that I’m unable to publish in NYT, can’t get through when I call WNYC, and barred from addressing the DOE. So…no, I’m not.
The way you are being deplatformed is absolutely outrageous, but please know you are nonetheless incredibly helpful to everyone who is trying to break through the wall of silence.
Masha "We all have regrets" Gessen always seems to have a seat at the table.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-new-yorker-interview/what-we-talk-about-when-we-talk-about-trans-rights
Does anyone believe Masha? I don't.
She also says her appearance hasn't changed much. Yes, those chemicals and surgeries are quite appearance-changing, Masha.
Yes, I found that New Yorker interview shocking at the time. Her offhand callousness about regret in particular.
Reminds me of this zinger by Lydia Polgreen. Lydia attended the Genspect conference in Denver in November of 2023.
Her piece in NYT: She compares her decision not to try out for the swim team in sixth grade (regrets!) to young people eventually regretting their life-altering decisions to take hormones and undergo “gender-affirming surgeries.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/01/opinion/politics/life-without-regret.html
Also, here's a sampling from my watching Republicans that gives me some hope too . . . Here's a point in the video where Republican Dan Crenshaw (TX) answers a question from the audience about "the transgenders":
https://www.youtube.com/live/Tk8-G9O2oGE?si=vcNC-x7ARH_3VbJ-&t=2410 (40:10)
What I find remarkable in this video is this culturally conservative Republican talking like this: " there's a gay community too that's just like 'We don't . . . well, we're not part of this. We're just trying to live our lives, you know. We don't . . . we're not trying to do all the weird stuff and things with kids -- like that's not us!' and they get very offended by it -- and rightfully so! They're just people trying to live their lives."
Listened to the latest excellent Informed Dissent yesterday where you all discussed this juncture we are at, where it is even harder than ever for us in the liberal camp to talk to Democrats. Yeah, it feels almost impossible right now. The main piece of hope I have is that things keep changing, so this will change too, maybe sooner than later. YOU are changing it, as you have from the beginning. Conversations must keep happening, and the private ones are at least as important as the public ones. Unctuous as Gavin's hair or personality is (let's just say both), I applaud him and any and all Democrats shifting. The best thing about the story of Gavin "standing up" for women is that it is very unlikely courage that inspired him. He is more likely reading the room and the political tea leaves. His oily self does not matter. To me, it indicates change is happening in the back channels. The guy has the phone numbers of billionaires on his phone, he sure does. In a post-Citizen's United world, it's all about the funding, for all politics. Thanks Lisa!
I’m not a fan of Newsom . I don’t see him as a Blue Dog(I happen to be one myself) and to me dating all the way back to 2004, he’s shown himself to be completely inauthentic and only out for his own Self Interests. Meanwhile, Beto O’Rourke has done the opposite and has shown himself to blunt, fearless and fully authentic. Also, As a California bred Texan, I Never liked Newsom.
Oooh, that was a great speech. Also, Wheeler is kinda hot. Am I allowed to say that? Is truth a defense?
We’re all thinking it, so thanks for saying it out loud!
Cynical libertarian-oriented person that I am, upon listening to that speech, I could not help but feel a gush of unabashed affection for that beautiful man, Jonah Wheeler.
I also listen to UnderCurrents whenever commentator Emily Jashinsky interviews a "lefty," in hopes of hearing about signs that the regime of zealots are losing their hold on what is supposed to be Trump's "loyal opposition." Perhaps the following is one more piece of evidence that things are about to change in the Democratic Party? Jashinsky has recently interviewed a well-established journalist, David Weigel, who has covered the Bernie Sanders-related political events over the years. Jashinsky has more conservative leanings, but (in the spirit of the U.K. based show, UnHerd) she often airs the perspectives and nuance of political forces that are left-leaning too. In this episode, there is discussion of the signs that rank and file Democrats are starting to reject the old guard in the party in a way that both she and Weigel agree seem similar to the Tea Party Movement that attempted to revamp the Republicans in the past, before Trump blew in and turned it MAGA.
This is not directly related to the issue of "trans" and how the leadership of the Democratic party have so stubbornly and myopically clung to the increasingly discredited trans activist narratives. But I think it is one more piece of evidence that the Party's current lockstep alignment with fringe ideologies, even when polling indicates "Woke" policy doesn't enjoy majority support, continues to piss off a lot of left-leaning voters and distracts from bread and butter concerns . . . It may be that, just as a whole lot of voters indulged their desire for their own "berzerker" to disrupt all those (cue Jesus story from Bible) "money changers in the Temple," a similar populist wave is finally building up before the Democratic establishment.
Voters are looking for "the craziest son of a bitch in the race."
There is an insight first made by Republican Rep. Massie to explain voters' attraction to Trump, and in this interview Jashinsky refers to it repeatedly regarding the rallies that Bernie Sanders is having: see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jufwz0BrpBM
Is it just me, or does Wheeler look and speak like a younger Obama? Love him and admire his courage. I hope he has a bright future ahead of him!
On Newsom, I think it’s really important not to give praise that is not yet due. We have already been burned once on that with Suozzi and Moulton, with many of us reaching out to thank them for speaking up only to have them go ahead and vote vs. HR28. Similarly, with Newsom, I see his talk as hollow. His state is among the most egregious, as we know, and he has neither said nor done anything to change that so far. For example, I understand that there are now two bills pending on which he could “do a Wheeler” and speak up in support of them. So far as I know, he has said nothing. So, as of yet, I don’t think there is any basis on which to see him as praiseworthy, let alone an ally in this fight. The criticisms of him I have seen from sex-realists are valid and should not be disparaged.
Good for Newsom to speak up (a little bit) on this, and doing podcasts with people with whom he disagrees, but in my view his reputation is unrecoverable. What he did during Covid, keeping California public school kids out of school for a year and a half while sending his own to an open private, is inexcusable, and I will never be able to see him as anything but a slimy, self-serving hypocrite. I really hope he is not the Democratic candidate in 2028.
It's both Newsom's Hair AND Personality, Lisa!
Both pretty darn Unctuous, in my book! (He was, briefly, my neighbor, so this is an up-close view! ;). Tho I do appreciate his - and other Dems - willingness to treat this complex topic with the nuance it deserves!
Theirry/Wheeler 2028?
Jonah Wheeler of New Hampshire has also broken ranks with Democratic policy on women's rights. Thank you Jonah!
Very brave. It gives me hope.
You may want to reconsider how you framed this. It comes off somewhat racist, as if only what white people think matters.
Updated, thank you.
What? Where did you pull that framing from?
Maybe because the graphic from the NBC poll shows only the opinions of white voters (by sex and education level)? And so, to say “everyone” hates the Democrats implies that white voters are “everyone.” Which of course they are not. But (according to the original NBC story) they are 71% of the electorate.
Ideally “we” - as in any of us who speak out at all - should be thanking Newsom for finally saying something true and helpful, while also reminding him that he has caused untold suffering and had better walk back his destructive, homophobic, insane policies regarding children and teens and social and medical transition - NOW. It should be possible to encourage good behavior and also plead for more of it and roundly criticize his prior actions. Right?
Right! I didn't mean to memory hole all he's done wrong, but rather to encourage him to keep going in the right direction.
I see. The NBC poll was pretty specific about why they were using only this data to demonstrate the growing political gulf between men and women of this racial cohort but I can see why using the term 'everyone' by our host is not accurate. Good catch.
I can’t take the credit for the original catch — that was the commenter to whom you were responding. And it looks like our host has indeed adjusted accordingly.