LP.org: Gender self-determination is not government’s business

Posted at LP.org:

Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government’s treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws.

President Donald Trump’s administration is taking aim at transgender Americans. According to a leaked draft memo released by the New York Times, the Department of Health and Human Services is considering this redefinition: “Sex means a person’s status as male or female based on immutable biological traits identifiable by or before birth.” There are many things wrong with this definition, but chief among them is that it’s scientifically incorrect. According to the Intersex Society of North America, approximately 1 percent of people cannot be so simply classified based on their biology. There are at least 16 biological and medical conditions that deviate from the usual male or female classifications. Examples include Klinefelter’s syndrome, adrenal hyperplasia, and gonadal dysgenesis.

This definition also ignores a basic principle of civil society: A matter as personal as gender identification should be decided by the person involved, not by the government. At the 2016 Republican convention, candidate Trump promised to stand up for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community. That led prominent transgender rights activist Caitlyn Jenner to join the Republican Party, expressing belief that she “could work within the party and the Trump administration to shift the minds of those who most needed shifting.” In a recent Washington Post column, she acknowledged that she had been wrong.

Last year, Libertarian National Committee Chair Nicholas Sarwark, who is also now running for mayor of Phoenix, anticipated Jenner’s eventual disenchantment with the GOP and issued this invitation:

Dear Caitlyn Jenner,

If you are tired of your political party denigrating you for who you are, tired of them demeaning and degrading you, I want to personally extend an invitation to join the Libertarian Party.

We are not as big as the Republican Party. We don’t have as many representatives, senators, or presidents as the Republican Party.

In fact, we are a small minority, despised and derided by establishment politicians from both of the old parties. There’s no reason for you to leave the size and safety of the Republicans.

Except, what we lack in size, we make up for by our commitment to the rights and dignity of all Americans. Libertarians stand for all freedoms, for all people, all of the time.

Even if they are a tiny minority. Even if they are hated by social conservatives. Even if the president thinks it’s good political strategy to deny them the opportunity to serve their country in the military.

If you want to come home to a political party that will welcome and respect you, our door is open.

Yours in liberty,

Nicholas Sarwark
Chair, Libertarian National Committee

That invitation to transgender people, and all other government-persecuted minorities, needless to say, still stands.

Libertarians understand that the most vulnerable minority is an individual person. That’s why voters can always count on the more than 800 Libertarians running for local, state, and federal office this year to defend individuals and their rights from government persecution.

81 thoughts on “LP.org: Gender self-determination is not government’s business

  1. Thomas L. Knapp

    Yeah, I’ve been seeing said apoplexy over on Facebook.

    !OMG THEY ARE VIRTUE SIGNALING TO THE LEFT OMG SOCIALISM!

    It actually works like this:

    1) There’s an item in the news cycle;

    2) The LP’s platform addresses that item; so

    3) LPHQ issues a release noting the party’s position.

    When LPHQ is cooking with gas on that particular public communications front (as it has been since Sarwark was first elected chair), that generally happens at least once a week, maybe even two or three times a week during a busy week.

    But nobody strokes out when the issue is taxes or trade or tariffs or foreign policy. The only time people freak out is when the LP’s position happens to appeal to people whose social issues views are even a smidgen to the left of Pat Buchanan’s. Then it’s suddenly the end of the fucking world.

  2. paulie Post author

    Yeah, I’ve been seeing said apoplexy over on Facebook.

    As Nick said on a different subject – their tears are delicious.

  3. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    I believe it is quite sad that, per the above, the Libertarian Party panders to a tiny but politically powerful “identity group” by buying into bogus scientific arguments and ignoring the concerns of the great majority of people. Most people prefer not to have their own identity defined by any tiny minority of individuals, including those who label themselves “transgender” or similar “gender fluid” terms. My comments below reply to quotes included above.

    * First, this statement allegedly from the Trump administration is true: “Sex means a person’s status as male or female based on immutable biological traits identifiable by or before birth.” Biological sex is NOT gender. Gender is a subjective psychological viewpoint, and one that can be quite mutable. For example, most young people who think they are transgender eventually realize they actually are gay or lesbian. But transgender activists, parents afraid of having gay/lesbian children, and the state that seeks ever more reaons to regulate our lives may have their own reasons to encourage children to “transition” to the “opposite sex”. These changes to children eventually can interfere with their acting upon their true sexual orientation. Some gays and lesbians worry it may be a movement of genocide against them.

    * This LP statement is both irrelevant and dubious. “According to the Intersex Society of North America, approximately 1 percent of people cannot be so simply classified based on their biology. There are at least 16 biological and medical conditions that deviate from the usual male or female classifications. Examples include Klinefelter’s syndrome, adrenal hyperplasia, and gonadal dysgenesis.”
    The intersex issue is largely irrelevant to transgenderism. Few transgenders have any of the medical issues above. Thus the 1 percent statistic doesn’t apply to transgenders who merely reject the biological sex to which they were born.
    Note the 1% is itself a questionable number. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex It includes people whose chromosomes may not be typically male or female but whose sexual identity agrees with their solely male or female sex organs. Intersex people with indeterminate sexual organs or organs of both sexes tend to identify and choose one sex and stay with it; some choose to be “bisexual”. They do not “transition” to a different sex. This is just one example of the many unscientific arguments used to support transgender ideology.
    Obviously the government should allow all of the above to identify as they choose. As should parents. Currently too often parents choose the intersex child’s sex for them leading to years of pain for the child as it grows to realize its true sexual identity.

    * This LP statement is true, but incomplete. “This definition also ignores a basic principle of civil society: A matter as personal as gender identification should be decided by the person involved, not by the government.” The statement reflects platform plank 1.4 quoted in this article’s introductory image: “Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government’s treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws.”

    Those statements are NOT the whole story. They leave the false impression that the Libertarian Party supports extending anti-discrimination laws to transgenders. Elected libertarians in New Hampshire’s statehouse actually boasted about voting to add transgenders to the state anti-discrimination laws. This means that private facilities that do discriminate can be subjected to prosecution, fines and even imprisonment. Obviously, the most controversy is caused by unpopular laws allowing male-bodied individuals who self-identify as women to have free access to women’s bathrooms, showers, abused and homeless women’s shelters and even prisons.

    The LP statements ignore this part of the Libertarian Party platform: “3.5 Rights and Discrimination – Libertarians embrace the concept that all people are born with certain inherent rights. We reject the idea that a natural right can ever impose an obligation upon others to fulfill that “right.” We condemn bigotry as irrational and repugnant. Government should neither deny nor abridge any individual’s human right based upon sex, wealth, ethnicity, creed, age, national origin, personal habits, political preference or sexual orientation. Members of private organizations retain their rights to set whatever standards of association they deem appropriate, and individuals are free to respond with ostracism, boycotts and other free market solutions.”

    Of course, this plank is written like the abortion plank. Both planks bury the libertarian principle: that government should stay out of the abortion issue and government should not force people to associate with those they do not want to. The abortion plank emphasizes the “conscience” of the pro-lifer. The Rights and Discrimination plank emphasizes the alleged “bigotry” of anyone who chooses to discriminate on any of the listed grounds. The right to free association is buried between examples of bigotry and the threat of private harassment and sanctions. Delegates should reject this clumbsy politicization of both planks.

    More importantly, transgender activists go well beyond “ostracism, boycotts and other free market solutions” to protest those who they call bigots merely because they disagree with their ideology. They engage in actual fraud and force.

    * Transgender ideology as promoted by the most aggressive ideologues promotes fraudulent ideas: sex organs are irrelevant and only self-identity counts; transgender ideology should define what is man and woman; “cis-gender” people (those who identify with the sex “assigned” at birth) are bigots who should have lesser rights to define sex and gender; anyone rejecting transgender ideology supports violence and murder of transgenders and contributes to their suicides.

    * Transgenders often claim their only self-defense is massive harassment of those who disagree with them, including no platforming of them and campaigns to have them fired from jobs and actual physical violence.

    * “Die, TERF, Die” is a frequent threat/meme/chant; TERF is usually used against women who disagree, meaning “Transgender Excluding Radical Feminist”. But it is used against males too.

    * Physical threats of violence including by transgenders carrying bats and shields at various protests, as well as past actual violence and even murder of those who disagree. Women protesting transgender ideology have been attacked at their forums and at protests. One white male-to-female transgender in California is awaiting trial for killing two black lesbians and their son; he had quarreled with them in the past over the Michigan Women’s Music Festival’s rules, including forbidding naked penises at the festival.

    * Finally, of course, transgenders have organized in a big way to change laws to force the great majority of men and women to say something they do not believe: that anyone who identifies as male or female – no matter how obvious it is they are not – is in fact male or female. Refuse to do so and you may face penalty of law. Of course, this affects businesses more than individuals. Already New York city can impose a $250,000 fine on any company that allows employees to “mis-gender” an individual. So obviously all other sorts of intervention in employment and service markets may be allowed by applicable state laws. Of course, like many ideological and identity groupings, some transgenders promote outlawing any individual criticism of their group as “hate crimes” and even subjecting “haters” to re-education.

    Where does transgender ideology get its support? From “progressive” journalists and activists always looking for the new, edgy “civil rights” cause, preferably a “gotcha” cause they can use to make opponents look like right wing bigots. (Something LP leaders obviously are trying to avoid.) They tend to support politically correct ideologies that can make people bend to the will of “progressive’s” favorite entity – big government.

    Where do the transgender activists and academic supporters get all their money? Could it be in large part from politically powerful “Big Pharma” which looks forwards to billions in profits as hundreds of thousands of confused young people are encouraged to become dependent on hormone and other treatments for life? See http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/20/rich-white-men-institutionalizing-transgender-ideology/

    Libertarians should not let our principles be watered down by layers of pandering rhetoric. Not by pandering to abortion prohibitionists who demand the LP smother the right to abortion under language recognizing the consciences of deniers of women’s freedom. And not by pandering to identity politics activists who demand the LP bury its opposition to the government regulating the right to free association.

    Libertarians should not let themselves be bullied by those who threaten doxing, work harassment, no platforming, organizational ostracism, etc. And we certainly should not be intimidated by those who scream “Die, TERF, Die and “Die, Cis Scum, Die” and even physically attack if you do not agree with their non-scientific social and political ideology.

    From carol the ass kicking radical feminist so don’t call me a right winger.

  4. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Hey, Billy. Real intelligent reply to any number of valid points.

    Sounds like intimidation to me. Jerk.

  5. William T. Forrest

    I don’t go by Billy, never have. You had zero valid points, and my response was valid, intelligent and compassionate in light of the offensive drivel you spewed. That you would see it as intimidating is further evidence that you badly need psychiatric help. It’s a shame that you don’t realize it.

  6. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Ohh, boo hoo. I’m so scared. Male chauvinist? Or progressive? ha ha ha

  7. William T. Forrest

    Normally, I wouldn’t read much less post anything this long here, but it is very powerful and moving please read it. Also, it’s from facebook, and with their weird terms and conditions on who can see what I’m not sure how many of you would be able to see it if I just posted the link.

    George Godwyn wrote:

    Something happened on Facebook awhile ago that I’ve never written about and only shared with a few people. I kept it to myself, mostly, because I didn’t want to upset the people in question, but I guess it’s time. (And for probably the first time I am going to put a content warning on a post, because this post probably requires one. So, here’s a CW for violence against trans people.)

    For a long time, I wondered about the understanding of gender on the far right, the Trump right. The bathroom controversy, in particular I thought bizarre. I can understand the basic conservatism and fear of new ideas, but the bathroom conflict seemed odd to me. It was extremely important in the minds of Trump supporters, even though it can’t possibly be a common problem in most of the areas these people live. The position on the right seemed precisely the opposite of what it should be. Why do you want someone presenting as a woman in every respect using the damn men’s room, or vice versa? Isn’t that going to be more socially outrageous, in most situations? I didn’t get it. So I decided to ask the Trump supporters.

    I posted a picture of Buck Angel, a transgender adult film actor, in a few of large, sometimes huge, Trump groups. The picture showed a very buff, ripped Mr. Angel from the waist up, shirtless, with a shaved head and sporting a Fu Manchu mustache. He is an extremely masculine looking guy. With the picture I included the question “This person has a vagina. Which bathroom should they use?”

    I thought at least some of these people will realize how silly it would be to want this man to use the ladies room. How socially awkward and alarming that would be, in so many situations. Putting aside how dangerous it would be for the man, simply on the basis of the the immediate, practical effect on the other diners in the given Applebee’s or wherever it was happening.

    The post got hundreds of comments, finally thousands. Immediately. The Trump supporters had a very clear answer and they were adamant about it. Almost no answered with “the men’s room”. A few said things like “if they’ve got a vagina, they use a woman’s room, if they have a penis, they use the men’s room.” But the majority of the of the commenters had an answer I hadn’t considered at all. These people had worked out a very simple solution to the problem of transgender people and the norms revolving public restrooms.

    They wanted transgender people to die.

    They were quite explicit about it, very blunt. “They should die.” That simple. That concise. “They should die.”

    Let me be entirely clear about this – they knew what they were saying, they knew exactly what they wanted. They didn’t want a trans man in the men’s room and they didn’t want a trans man in the woman’s room. They wanted the trans man to be dead.

    Of course some of them were more loquacious than that. They had reasons they should die, preferred methods, they expressed their feelings about the fantasized the deaths, but death or something similar was the most common answer. “Stop being”, essentially. A lot of other people answered “they should stay home”, maintaining the status quo without having to deal with the problem while still allowing transgender people to, you know, live, but mostly death or some sort of violence was the preferred option. Comment after comment, they should die, fuck them, stay-at-home, don’t use the bathroom, I’ll kill them if I catch them in the bathroom with my daughter, they should die, they should die, they should die.

    Oh, and in case That’s not plain enough, it wasn’t just death they were threatening. They were threatening anything they could think of. Torture, castration, humiliation, at adults and children alike. Any brutal, vicious insult or threat imaginable. I’ve watched these groups for years, dozens of them. Anyone who watches the news, who’s seen our president make a speech, knows how mean, how grotesque, how petty and ugly these people can be. The things they say about Mexicans, Muslims, about women, gay people, immigrant children. Even if you haven’t been in one of these groups, it’s not hard to imagine. Jesus, our president publicly mocked a disabled man. But I still wasn’t prepared for the comments in this thread. Just sheer, stark, gut level hatred, unencumbered by the slightest empathy. Loathing. Disgust. Raw hate.

    As much time as I’ve spent in these groups, examining these people, I didn’t think anything could shock me. I was wrong. Maybe it shouldn’t have, but it did.

    There is not one single issue that brings the evil out in Trump supporters the way trans-people do, there is no class of people more loathed. More than anything else, gender self-determination symbolizes precisely the social progress that animates the Trump right. They despise it and the people who embody it. Understand this. This issue is central to these people on the right, there is nothing they feel more deeply about. The Trump right does not want a solution to the social problem of trans people and restroom use. They simply do not want trans people to exist. That is what they want. What they demand. Nonexistence.

    Today the New York Times reported that the Trump administration is now in the process of redefining the administrative understanding of gender as simply a matter of biology and nothing more. Gender would be determined solely and entirely by birth assignment – as male or female, immutable and unchangeable, a fact. They are already rolling back numerous civil rights guarantees instantiated in the Obama years, policies that allowed a significant portion of our nation to live their lives with some basic dignity and safety. Essentially the Department of Health and Human Services intends to define transgender people out of existence.

    This is happening now. Right now.

    Like I said at the beginning, I never really talked about that little test I did in the Trump groups with Buck Angel’s picture much before this. I know so many trans people and I know how difficult it can be for them, sometimes, just to live their lives, what a scary place the world can be. I felt like it was all too awful, I didn’t want to scare people even more. I guess it probably wouldn’t come as a shock to most of my trans friends, it’s a reality they live every day, but I just didn’t want to pile on. But it’s too late for all that now.

    I haven’t heard people talking about the Health and Human Services attack on trans rights all that much, so far, and I’m a little surprised, because we should all be clear about something. The changes they are making don’t mean a little inconvenience for a few trans people.

    They mean death. It’s that simple. It’s going to mean withdrawal, seclusion, humiliation, violence and death.

    Think about the Trump supporters I described, think about the thousands of comments I just told you about. Now think about the reinforcement this sort of decision makes for their worst instincts, think about a trans man, presenting as a man, being forced to use the ladies room in some Podunk, red state, Trump voting shithole.

    Now how do you suppose that goes down with the rest of the folks in the having dinner? And how do you suppose the teenage trans boy using the ladies room goes down with the parents of the teenage girls at the high school? And how does that make the teenage trans boy feel? Or the teenage trans girl having to share a bathroom with the testosterone jacked 17-year-old jocks at the high school? And what do you suppose happens to the trans girl forced to onto a man’s prison block?

    Humiliation, violence, rape, suicide, and murder. Death. Trans rights are a matter of life and death, in a very real, very palpable way. The definitions change, and people die. The rules change, and people die. The laws change, and people die. Immediately.

    This is happening because the people in the White House get it. They know their base, and they know exactly what their base wants. They got it 100% right this time. They are defining transgender people out of existence because they know their base wants transgender people to be dead.

    Trans rights, opposition to gender self-determination, hatred for trans people, as I’ve already described, are at the heart of the Trump phenomena. There is nothing that evokes the hatred and fear and violence on the right the way the simple existence of trans people does. It is stomach turning to see, horrible in its blind ferocity, and I don’t know how the fuck my trans friends have the strength and poise to live every day in the face of that horror, that hatred, but they do. I suppose they have to, and that’s where the fight is now.

    I don’t care who you are, I don’t care where you are in the political spectrum, I don’t care how fucking liberal or leftist you are, I don’t care how feminist you are, if you don’t support trans-rights, you are not on my fucking side. I don’t give a fuck about your bio–essentialist arguments, I don’t give a fuck about your history with men, I don’t care about your pissing eight year old or your bigot grandmother. Frankly, I don’t give a fuck about your traumatic sexual assault if it means you’re going to take it out on some fucking teenage girl who doesn’t want to have to use a bathroom with a bunch of frat boys and have the same fucking thing happen to her. Fuck you.

    If you want to know where the battle lines are drawn most clearly and unmistakably, between decency and the dark, right now, in the United States, in 2018, it’s here. Trans rights are the battlefield and trans people, like it or not, are in the vanguard of that battle. They are the front-line in a fight they never asked for, every fucking day, every hour, every time they leave the fucking house.

    There is no fight more important as this, now, today. There are no people so vulnerable, so marginalized and there should be no fucking doubt among anyone on the left, any liberal, any libertarian, about this.

    The fight is here now, it’s happening. An entire marginalized community, federally defined out of existence and set up to be victimized by a segment of the population too fucking backwards and just plain, willfully dumb to bother to try and understand what the hell is going on in the world, or empathize with another fucking human being.

    If we don’t stop this, people are going to die, killed for something they can’t change, for who they are in the deepest part of themselves. Not somewhere down the road, not in five years, but now. They’re going to start dying now.

    We can’t let that happen. Those of us who still live in the modern world still own this culture and we need to do what we can to make sure it doesn’t. We cannot go back to the 1950s, we cannot watch more people die simply for being born a woman or a man. We cannot let that happen. We can’t lose this battle.

    This isn’t temporary, this isn’t going to go away tomorrow, the last two years is only the beginning. Gender self-determination will be the civil rights battle of the 21st century. If we have to fight this for the rest of our lives, we cannot allow these fuckers, this raw hate, to win.

    So be shocked for a second, cry about it for a minute, and while you’re at it, maybe today is a good day to hug your trans friends, tell them you got their back. Because we do, a lot of us. America isn’t just Trump supporters. Remember that, guys and gals. For what it’s worth, some of us got your back.

    Then get over it and get ready, because this is a fight and you’re in it. We all are, all of us, left, liberal, libertarian, right, if you’re a decent human being and you care about basic human rights, you’re in it up to your ass and the water is rising fast.

    Hatred is a powerful emotion and it is temporarily ascendant, but hate can’t beat the future, and that future is an America, a world, where every single trans person lives their life safely and with the same dignity any other man or woman enjoys, because ultimately, as badly as they want to, they just can’t turn back the clock. Not when so many of us stand in their way, not with so many lives on the line. They just can’t.

    And that really is immutable, unchangeable. That really is a fact.

    #WontBeErased

  8. William T. Forrest

    Well considering you are the one trying to erase people, Carol, why do you think someone is trying to scare you? You are the one who wants to aid and abet a new holocaust. Shame on you.

  9. William T. Forrest

    It’s not Bill either, but nice try.

    Josh Shepard: “Their hate for the transgender is just the beginning. The reality is, they want us all dead. Everyone who thinks and feels differently than them. Everyone who looks different, sounds different, sees the world from a different perspective. They want us all dead. Trump worshipers are beyond reasoning with. This is a fight to protect the vulnerable, certainly, but make no mistake, it will not end with them. This is a fight for survival. To give one inch is to lose everything.”

  10. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Those wanting to be free of false ideologies imposed by the state do not usually want false ideologues dead.

    They just want to be left alone by them. But you obviously aren’t a libertarian, just an identity ideologue.

    The MEN who want them dead are just afraid they’ll pick up some girl at a bar and find out too late she’s got a big dick between her legs. And then there are those males who are afraid the dick will turn them on.

    So take it out on the violent males who fear homosexuality not on frightened women who fear rape in what they thought always would remain safe places.

  11. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Paulie: Was this posted at LP FB page where all those alleged negative responses were? I didn’t see it at the page or through a general FB search. Thanks.

  12. William T. Forrest

    “Those wanting to be free of false ideologies imposed by the state do not usually want false ideologues dead.”

    No, it’s not those who want to be free of Putin’s Agent Orange Drumpf and his gang redefining people out of existence who want those false ideologues dead. We do just want to be left alone by them. But they don’t want to return the favor. They went anyone who is not them dead, and that includes libertarians. And here you are aiding and abetting one of the first cars of those they scapegoat and demonize being loaded on the Trump Train to the death camps. You don’t realize that you and me will be on one of the subsequent cars. You will, most likely too late to do anything about it though.

    “Those wanting to be free of false ideologies imposed by the state do not usually want false ideologues dead.”

    As it so happens I am, and proud that my party is taking the correct stance here along with many other libertarians (not including the paleo/altreich contingent who really should not be considered libertarians at all no matter how much they constantly insist they are the only true libertarians).

    “The MEN who want them dead are just afraid they’ll pick up some girl at a bar and find out too late she’s got a big dick between her legs. ”

    Well that’s certainly a valid reason to wish torture and death on people , or at the very least not allow them to go out in public, right?

    “And then there are those males who are afraid the dick will turn them on.”

    Congratulations, you finally said something accurate. Why do you want to be aligned with such sick men?

    “So take it out on the violent males who fear homosexuality not on frightened women who fear rape in what they thought always would remain safe places.”

    But that’s exactly what you should tell yourself, once you realize that trans women are in fact women. You should really think about what George Godwyn wrote and think about how those scenarios play out in real life. Answer those questions he asks for yourself. I mean really think about it. Being on the side of bigots is no way to live.

  13. William T. Forrest

    “Was this posted at LP FB page where all those alleged negative responses were? ”

    The title of the articles says at LP.org, so you should look there. There have been discussions of it in many different facebook groups, pages and walls. Over the past week. I think the LP statement only came out today though and has not been posted on their national facebook page yet, but did get posted on the website as well as here.

  14. Thomas L. Knapp

    A couple of years ago I was at a sort of dialogue session about, and including, trans people at the church I attend (Metropolitan Community Church, generally thought of as an LGBTQ-centered denomination).

    One trans woman, when asked about “the bathroom issue” and whether she was afraid of being beat up for using the “wrong” restroom, kind of shocked most of the participants when she said “no, not really — because I always carry a .357 in my purse.”

    I certainly favor private property owners setting whatever rules they damn well please for their restrooms. And I’d rather EVERYTHING was private property.

    But IF government is going to maintain “public” restrooms on ITS property, they should be labeled “restroom” and that should be the end of it. Make them single person use, or have stalls for privacy. It’s not the government’s job to make sure Carol Moore isn’t irrationally afraid.

    Ditto for everything else government does. There is absolutely no area in which any person’s biological sex OR gender identity is any of its legitimate business.

  15. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Hey Tom see you are relatively rational compared to Mr. Forrest who obviously isn’t willing to come out of the closet with his real agenda.

    Any hooooo do you know in DC they make you REGISTER your pepper spray? Even pretty pink ones like I brought.

    So what’s worse? Having cops invade to get you for unregistered items or having pervs peek through the cracks into the stall? And having to wait til you’ve left and gone down the hall before you scream back at the ass hole and tell him what genitals his face looks like?

    But guys never have that problem in rest room, right? So safe for you big muscle men…

    Of course, gay men may have more to worry about. I’ve read some female to male transgenders who get hepped up on testosterone suddenly discover a taste for men and glory holes. LMAO…

    Read terrifying details here: https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/wj9739/hook-up-apps-saunas-clubs-queer-trans-experience – “What It’s Like Hooking Up in Cis Gay Spaces as a Queer Trans Guy”

  16. dL

    Read terrifying details here

    Is that the best your google search could come up…south London sexual politics? Terrified? No. Nostalgic? yeah, a bit.

    #freeLove

  17. Tony From Long Island

    Word of the Day: SUCCINCT – ADJECTIVE – (especially of something written or spoken) briefly and clearly expressed.

  18. William T. Forrest

    A couple of years ago I was at a sort of dialogue session about, and including, trans people at the church I attend (Metropolitan Community Church, generally thought of as an LGBTQ-centered denomination).

    One trans woman, when asked about “the bathroom issue” and whether she was afraid of being beat up for using the “wrong” restroom, kind of shocked most of the participants when she said “no, not really — because I always carry a .357 in my purse.”

    That’s all well and good and will probably be OK since very few if any women she goes to the bathroom with will know she is not born female. If she has to go to use male restrooms in most cases it will be OK as well since running into whole packs of armed bashers or bashers who want to get into a shootout or bashers who have close combat training and the guts to disarm her must be very rare, and because regardless of what the law says there will pretty much never be someone checking genitalia at restroom entrances. But what if she goes to jail or prison, rightfully or wrongfully? If the Trump standard is enacted she will be sent to a men’s facility regardless of whether she is pre-op or post-op, without any weapon.

  19. Anthony Dlugos

    Some might consider relevant:

    “To leave unacknowledged the way the state (as well as the culture) discriminated against more than half the of the population, leaving them substantially unfree, is to ignore the real history and concerns of people who might be attracted to a libertarianism that actually heard those concerns. Libertarians have a very good story to tell about how the state, abetted by various Bootleggers and Baptists, has consistently made the lives of women, people of color, and sexual minorities miserable for 200 years by restricting their economic and social freedoms.”

    “Too many libertarians today continue to have a large blind spot about the concerns of people of color, women, LGBTs. It’s writing as if the white, straight, Christian, property owning male’s experience were universal, when it most certainly was and is not. And until we get rid of that blind spot and recognize the different experiences of those groups in American history and how it relates to freedom, libertarians are never going to widen our appeal.”

    The Errors of Nostalgi-tarianism

    https://www.libertarianism.org/columns/errors-nostalgi-tarianism?utm_content=74322510&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

  20. William T. Forrest

    I certainly favor private property owners setting whatever rules they damn well please for their restrooms. And I’d rather EVERYTHING was private property.

    But IF government is going to maintain “public” restrooms on ITS property, they should be labeled “restroom” and that should be the end of it. Make them single person use, or have stalls for privacy. It’s not the government’s job to make sure Carol Moore isn’t irrationally afraid.

    Ditto for everything else government does. There is absolutely no area in which any person’s biological sex OR gender identity is any of its legitimate business.

    Fully agreed. And hopefully after this mass hysteria ends – hopefully soon, but I have my doubts – most private entities will likewise realize that any attempt to force people to use a restroom that does not correspond to how most people will perceive them is just not good for business. Who wants to repeatedly have police come out over violent incidents or clean blood off the floors and walls? I’m going to guess almost no one.

  21. robert capozzi

    AD,

    At this point, “blind spot” is too charitable. “Willful ignorance” seems more accurate.

    NAPists and other rigid propertarians desperately want there to be a blank slate, but those with eyes to see would recognize that the slate isn’t blank. There’s been millennia of one sort of social engineering, generally male and often white, biases, and the civil society was bracketed by those biases. Now, of course, this doesn’t mean that the ham-handed government can and will reverse the biases with new laws and regulations. Often, such action makes things worse.

    But I submit that the counter-charge of “social engineering” by NAPists and others completely misses the point. There’s always been social engineering. The better question is to seek a much fairer and more neutral form of undoing gender and racial/ethnic social engineering that we’ve inherited. On this, I’m a blank slate, but I’m open to better solutions to age-old problems.

  22. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Sure, there are lots of perfectly decent trans who aren’t trying to screw with or replace women. It’s the minority of women haters and abusers women worry about. Not that any guys here give a darn what women worry about, evidently, no matter how many statistics are presented or personal stories told. Just something to ridicule.

    Here’s an intellectual article on the unintended consequences of changing the concept of woman from the Economist. Of course, it’s only written by a woman born woman, so probably not credible to you guys. https://www.economist.com/open-future/2018/07/06/changing-the-concept-of-woman-will-cause-unintended-harms

    As a free individual I have the right to decide if a transwoman who claims to be female but acts like an obnoxious superior male, or just a creepy little instigator, gets sufficient respect for me to him “her”. Tuff if all the men’s rights guys out there can’t handle it.

    Do you know how many times I’ve heard or read a transwoman say to a woman-born woman “i’m a better woman than you’ll ever be.” At least three. I know a couple women online who reached “peak trans” hearing that phrase. Saying things like that is the very definition of male privilege.

    Any guys ever hear a transman say they’re a better man than you’ll ever be??

    Remember, also, 2/3 of “transwomen” keep their male parts and have little intention of transitioning. Many don’t even bother to do sex hormones, as article above mentions.

    For some, it’s just a way to get over. Like the “trans” who came to a woman’s coding meeting I went to a few years ago and starting taking phone numbers of several of the most attractive young women. Very creepy.

    Guys who defend that kind of behavior – not to mention outright physical aggression and criminal behavior because, after all those terfs deserve it – really don’t have much credibility with most women.

    Unfortunately most aren’t going to standup to a band of angry males in any kind of forum defending their brother/sisters. Unless they organize, of course. Which many are despite the insults and abuse and threats.

  23. dL

    The Errors of Nostalgi-tarianism

    In case anyone misconstrued what i said. Nostalgia referred to the free love scene and not to gender bathrooms designations.

  24. dL

    NAPists and other rigid propertarians desperately want there to be a blank slate….blah,blah,blah

    As a reminder, Bob Capozzi would turn an orgy into one of his cliched copy and paste rants against the non aggression principle.

  25. Shane

    How does this help Libertarians get elected?

    It’s one of those “who gives a shit?” statements among tolerate folks — while designed to pander to or offend everyone else.

    There are candidates out there fighting for a handful of votes, hoping to further the party and LPHQ is doing what?

    Are they targeting voters with digital? Text? Postal? Phones? Email? Canvassers?

    Do candidates even have access to modeled data files? Basic voter files?

    Is anyone bothering to pass on daily early voters to suppress?

    We know the answer to the above . . . no.

    We’re sitting around playing politics like toddlers having a tea party — going through the motions without a clue on how to make tea.

    Thing is, campaign and data advances have made this stuff easy — not even expensive. There’s really no excuse for our lack of action.

  26. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Shane wrote: “How does this help Libertarians get elected?”

    Probably some well healed LGBT types gave the LP a big contribution with the understanding it would push this issue in some way. Some very clumbsy and annoying way. Bullying and bribes tend to be two sides of same coin. (Among the major parties blackmail is often the third tactic.)

    Or it’s just the delusion that supporting the freedom of those on the fringes will attract their votes MORE than the Democrats promise to get the government to force their agenda on everyone else. Good luck with that.

  27. Thomas L. Knapp

    Finding ways to appeal to voters and then get them voters to the polls are important, of course.

    As priorities, they come not too terribly far behind being right. But they do come behind that , because if we’re not right, then all the rest is 1) evil, 2) purposeless public masturbation, or 3) both.

    Government gender identity definitions are a policy issue because Trump decided to make them a policy issue.

    Step one for the LP in dealing with any policy issue is to be right about it.

    Step two is to point out in general that we’re right about it.

    Step three is identify and target the voters who are also right about it so that we can make sure they know we’re on their side, and who care about it, so that they vote for our candidates.

  28. Shane

    Tom I get all that but our platform is clear. Our job isn’t to address policy issues. I’ve always said if we want to do that then why bother being a party with all of the restrictions.

    If there was a strategic purpose then I’m fully behind that but there’s no way LPHQ is being strategic about such releases.

    Here’s an example: obtain a voter file in a specific state. Serve 15 second videos on LGBT issues, to people searching about party stances who are also visitors to LGBT sites or apps. Whoever the ad serves to is a hit to be matched back to the voter file and added to an offline recruitment/GOTV effort.

    They could be doing it right now on the birthright nonsense and people searching for the 14th Amendment.

  29. robert capozzi

    TK,

    I’d suggest that Step Two is to determine whether the issue has reasonable sympathy and/or is not highly alienating to supermajorities of voters.

    Step Three is to assemble a range of issues to lead with that stand a reasonable chance of widespread acceptance among voters in the intermediate term. Issues that are deemed unripe would be back-burnered for another day.

    Your Two and Three would become Four and Five, from my perspective.

  30. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Again, this was a crappy press release because it pandered to a tiny minority instead of clearly stating Libertarian principles in a way that would attract those with libertarian sympathies and educate those ignorant of LP positions. A proper press release would have:

    * mentioned that the issues of sex and gender are controversial scientific, sociological and ideological ones which the LP does not take a stand on
    * emphasized the right of individuals to be free of force and fraud by individuals and private and public entities, including imposition of ideological, religious, economic and political positions by government
    * stated that libertarians are opposed to government funding of educational, religious, social, economic and other programs and of tying that funding to ideological, religious, economic and political positions which government bureaucrats decide to impose
    * mentioned the right of free association and the anti-libertarian nature of anti-discrimination laws, noting that free association is not a code word for bigotry
    * stated that libertarians disagree on government policies on “identity politics” issues (for example, on sex and ethnic quota numbers in legislative or government service positions, which some countries do have or, for example, whether government facilities must make all public multiple stall bathroom/locker room/shower room facilities and all jails and prison facilities available based on sexual identity and not physical sex.)

    The above represents the true libertarian position, and any complaints are doubtless regarding one or more of these missing or poorly explained points. See https://www.facebook.com/search/top/?q=Gender%20self-determination%20is%20not%20government%E2%80%99s%20business

    The LP should not be pandering to the loudest and most insulting minority, or trying to look “avante garde” by ignoring basic principles. Especially IF there’s some some big contributions thrown in to pay LPHQ bills and make the sell out go down a bit smoother.

  31. paulie Post author

    I think the LP statement only came out today though and has not been posted on their national facebook page yet, but did get posted on the website as well as here.

    It’s been posted to the FB page now.

  32. paulie Post author

    having pervs peek through the cracks into the stall?

    Has this been a big problem for you? Because trans people being beaten, assaulted, raped, killed and driven to suicide actually has been.

    But guys never have that problem in rest room, right?

    For the most part no. I rarely ever see a penis other than my own in public restrooms, and I use them all the time. Unless you turn your head and look most times you won’t see them. But I have seen some in the restrooms either accidentally or because some guys do like to show off. What’s the big deal though? I’ve seen plenty of penises and vaginas whether in the locker room or in clothing-optional events or wherever. I presume you have too. Why is it even a big deal?

    The danger is far less than the people who made it a political issue make out, except to trans people a lot of whom are scared to go out in public or develop physical problems from refraining from using restrooms and are assaulted much more often than anyone else. And to the extent that bathroom assaults do take place, men get assaulted as well. In most cases men who rape other men see themselves as straight and feminize the other man in their minds.

    Of course, gay men may have more to worry about. I’ve read some female to male transgenders who get hepped up on testosterone suddenly discover a taste for men and glory holes.

    How’s that a worry? Nothing will happen to you through a gloryhole except if you participate willingly. Anyone who gets sucked through a hole in the wall does not much care who does the sucking or they would want to see that person.

  33. paulie Post author

    Read terrifying details here

    Absolutely nothing terrifying there. Trans girls going into a male restroom at a high school or jail experience real terror, unlike whatever “my dating app experience was disappointing.”

  34. paulie Post author

    SUCCINCT GUIDE TO CAROL MOORE LOGIC

    Man who disagrees with Carol Moore: Sexist.

    Woman who disagrees with Carol Moore: Pink-haired tit-shaking hussy.

    Bingo.

  35. paulie Post author

    Any guys ever hear a transman say they’re a better man than you’ll ever be??

    Can’t remember. I’m sure I would melt like the witch in the Wizard of Oz though.

  36. paulie Post author

    How does this help Libertarians get elected?

    Differentiating from conservatives on cultural issues is important in letting voters know we are not just NSGOP Jr. And, a lot of people actually support us standing up to protect widely attacked groups of people from abuse inflicted by government.

    There are candidates out there fighting for a handful of votes, hoping to further the party and LPHQ is doing what?

    More than I’ve seen in the last 25 years plus.

    Are they targeting voters with digital? Text? Postal? Phones? Email? Canvassers?

    Actually yes, all of these. Check out what Cara, Apollo, Jess and Lauren have been doing over the past year.

    Thing is, campaign and data advances have made this stuff easy — not even expensive. There’s really no excuse for our lack of action.

    A big data reboot project is underway. Money is being raised and is a good chunk of way there.

  37. Jim

    Carol Moore “Do you know how many times I’ve heard or read a transwoman say to a woman-born woman “i’m a better woman than you’ll ever be.” At least three. I know a couple women online who reached “peak trans” hearing that phrase. Saying things like that is the very definition of male privilege. ”

    I can’t imagine anyone, male or female, responding to hearing that with anything but eye rolling or laughter, if they bothered responding at all. The demand among heterosexual men for men who have tried to turn themselves into women is nonexistent, or at least around the level of the demand among heterosexual men for women who are morbidly obese. It’s close enough to nonexistent that it makes no difference. The only reason why a woman would get upset by a comment like that is if she was so massively insecure with herself that she was afraid it was true.

  38. robert capozzi

    pf: Differentiating from conservatives on cultural issues is important in letting voters know we are not just NSGOP Jr.

    me: “Cultural” or “social” issues? To me, those terms have overlap, but are somewhat different. Generally, Ls are unconcerned with the “culture,” but advocate for maximum freedom from the government regarding “social” issues. Conservatives are concerned with both, and social issues are sometimes their chief concern. Many conservatives are anti-immigration for cultural reasons, for ex.

    I do agree that Ls should stress they are not conservative on social issues, although on the issue of abortion, it’s reasonable that a L would be pro-life.

  39. Tony From Long Island

    RC: ” . . . . . although on the issue of abortion, it’s reasonable that a L would be pro-life. . . . . ”

    I don’t see that as axiomatic at all. Quite the contrary actually.

  40. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    SUCCINCT GUIDE TO PAULIE LOGIC

    *Anyone who makes big financial contributions to Ballot Access. TAKE ON THEIR CAUSE.

    *Anyone who questions dubiously libertarian special interests buying LP influence that way. SHUT THE FUCK UP.

    JIMBO: Wait til some 300 lb weight lifting transman gets in your face telling you he’s a better man than you’ll ever be. Will you wrestle him to prove he’s not? ha ha ha

  41. Seebeck

    Notably missing from this press release is anything resembling details on this redefinition being directly attached to Title IX and its specific impacts to government policy, and by extension the impacts to the government’s excessive intrusions into private lives. Or, if you prefer, rather than complaining about what they’re doing, talk about how what they’e doing impacts people.

    As such, it’s long on gristle and short on red meat.

    It’s a poor press release, but not for the reasons (if you want to call them that) that Moore claims.

    It’s a poor press release because it doesn’t say anything useful. If I were an average voter without more knowledge of the subject, I would read this and go, “Yeah, so what?”

  42. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Re: http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2013/07/william-saturn-reviews-don-grundmanns-candlecrusade-org/ Obviously, especially in pre-teen years, it looks like state indoctrination. It certainly goes beyond teaching basic respect and civility for others, despite differences. With bullying of those who oppose even the most extreme examples of “education.”

    The same sort of thing has happened with pedophiles infiltrating other institutions.

    We all know that pedophiles have infiltrated the catholic church for centuries, protecting each other so they could do their dirty business. Using the holiness of their profession to render them without sin and to delegitimatize any complaints against them.

    This also has happened throughout young people’a sports where coaches can destroy or elevate a career and even sexual molestation of children has been allowed to happen as “medical therapy.”

    The same thing is happening with regards to NAMBLA types, including in the transgender movement. I’ve seen at least a dozen stories of young “trans” or “non-binary” people being seduced and/or molested by adult trans activists. And of course the LGBTQ community defends the abusers vigorously and verbally assaults accusers, parents and even the media for reporting it. Children who begin transition and decide to accept their “assigned at birth sex”, even if they declare they really are gay or lesbian, similarly are insulted, ostracized, etc.

    It’s even worse under the transgender activist intimidation regime where science is denied and academics are threatened for questioning allegedly scientific and sociological assertions of trans supporters. In case you’ve missed these articles:

    * “Trans Activists’ Campaign Against ‘TERFs’ has Become an Attack on Science
    written by Julian Vigo”
    https://quillette.com/2018/10/18/trans-activists-campaign-against-terfs-has-become-an-attack-on-science/

    * “UK universities struggle to deal with ‘toxic’ trans rights row; Abuse on campus, fear of speaking up – feminist academics say some universities aren’t protecting them”
    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/oct/30/uk-universities-struggle-to-deal-with-toxic-trans-rights-row

  43. robert capozzi

    TfLI,

    I’m pro-choice, but for me I respect the pro-life position. Where we draw the line for protected life is debatable and ultimately a function of popular will.

  44. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Seebeck wrote: “It’s a poor press release, but not for the reasons (if you want to call them that) that Moore claims.”

    So Seebeck…
    ** thinks the LP should take a stand on every controversial scientific, sociological and ideological idea pushed by special interest groups that might vote for it? or just the noisy monied ones?
    * doesn’t think the LP should emphasize the right of individuals to be free of force and fraud by individuals and private and public entities??
    * doesn’t think LP should oppose government funding to impose ideological, religious, economic and political positions ???
    * didn’t notice I mentioned the right of free association and the anti-libertarian nature of anti-discrimination laws, only noting that I didn’t clearly differentiate between govt and private discrimination under Title IX????
    * didn’t note that I made some reference to that in noting that libertarians disagree on government policies on “identity politics” – aka discrimination – issues like sex and ethnic quota numbers in legislative or government service positions????

    The latter being a topic which I remember debating a lot years ago but not lately. I mean I’d like to see a GOAL of 40% of all legislators and 50% of all high level govt employees being women (and similar representative goals for under-represented minorities), but undecided on making it a law…

    And what’s with the Supreme being ALL Catholic (5) and Jewish (3)? (Catholic Kavanaugh replacing Catholic Kennedy.)

    I’m not a Protestant or member of any of the Abrahamic Judeo/Christian/Muslim faiths, but I find that to be incredibly ODD….

  45. Anthony Dlugos

    RC,

    robert capozzi @ October 30, 2018 at 18:26:

    At this point, “blind spot” is too charitable. “Willful ignorance” seems more accurate.

    NAPists and other rigid propertarians desperately want there to be a blank slate, but those with eyes to see would recognize that the slate isn’t blank. There’s been millennia of one sort of social engineering, generally male and often white, biases, and the civil society was bracketed by those biases. Now, of course, this doesn’t mean that the ham-handed government can and will reverse the biases with new laws and regulations. Often, such action makes things worse.

    But I submit that the counter-charge of “social engineering” by NAPists and others completely misses the point. There’s always been social engineering. The better question is to seek a much fairer and more neutral form of undoing gender and racial/ethnic social engineering that we’ve inherited. On this, I’m a blank slate, but I’m open to better solutions to age-old problems.

    I certainly agree with you 100% there.

    On the other hand, in my reading of the article, I think it was directed moreso at the typical, less-than-dogmatic Libertarians who nonetheless STILL have the blind spot referred to and still answer policy questions with some level of a “perfect world” answer.

    The rigid NAPists you refer are not interested in widening our appeal if it means any relaxation of dogma. Indeed, they relish in such inflexibility, or at the very least consider it a selling point.

    Even after I lost my religion regarding the NAP as a political construct, I was still giving NAP-based answers to policy questions.

    Politically speaking, we have to go further than most Libertarians realize in order to compensate for that lack of a blank slate here in the real world that you referred to. Much further.

  46. Tony From Long Island\

    RC, I have a similar position to you except that I have a harder time seeing the point of view of the pro-life side

  47. robert capozzi

    TfLI,

    It’s easy enough for me. The fetus is a human deserving the same protection as a born person.

    That’s not my view, but I can see it.

  48. Anthony Dlugos

    I am as pro-choice as they come, but I’m also pragmatic.

    Given the contentiousness of the issue and the fact that this is a political party, its unlikely we are going to have 100% agreement.

    Gotta accept the fact that in the more conservative states, its likely that we’ll have candidates who hold less than optimal positions. The best we can do is keep the reproductive rights plank strong in the national platform in an effort to keep the prohibitionists as close to the line as possible.

  49. robert capozzi

    AD,

    That’s a healthy attitude.

    My challenge to pro-lifers is that they need to convince very strong majorities (+70%) that the fetus is a full human deserving equal rights. If they can succeed in doing so, the law will follow. Currently, weak majorities favor abortion rights in most cases.

    Now, to muddy the waters, I happen to think that the Supremes landed on a very good and serviceable view, although I also think that Roe was inappropriately decided procedurally speaking. My position pisses just about everyone off, but that’s where I come down. At this point, though, it is settled. If the day comes where 70% are pro-life, it’d be time to re-open the conversation, but until then, pro-lifers should be working on hearts and minds, and supporting adoption alternatives.

  50. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    To reply now with a rational argument to your rational argument, as opposed to an ad hominen one to your adhominen argument.

    Paulie: The issue is male violence against others. Sure, some trans fear it in men’s rooms. But if they’re attacked they complain and it makes the news. And there are lots of single stall retreats now a days. Plus these guys want it locker rooms, showers, homeless shelters, prisons, and enough of them aren’t genuine trans but pervs and sex criminals looking for opportunity that women DO have something to worry about.

    Women fear violence from all male-bodied people everywhere, though women report only around 36 percent of rapes, 34 percent of attempted rapes, and 26 percent of sexual assaults. How many times do you think they report guys peaking through the stall, flashing them and running out, saying filthy things to them in these “private spaces?” A lot fewer.

    “Trans” put in women’s shelters and prisons already are being prosecuted for sexually assaulting women. Let the LGBT community work to create alternate spaces where they are free from violence. Don’t force the results of male violence on trans to lead to violence against women through allowing woman haters and abusers of whatever kind into women’s private spaces.

  51. paulie Post author

    I can’t imagine anyone, male or female, responding to hearing that with anything but eye rolling or laughter, if they bothered responding at all.

    Agreed.

    The only reason why a woman would get upset by a comment like that is if she was so massively insecure with herself that she was afraid it was true.

    Also agreed.

  52. paulie Post author

    SUCCINCT GUIDE TO PAULIE LOGIC

    *Anyone who makes big financial contributions to Ballot Access. TAKE ON THEIR CAUSE.

    Not at all. For one thing, I’ve done ballot access work for a grand total of about 2 or 3 weeks in the past year, and don’t know whether or when I will be doing any again, so it’s not a huge concern anymore. For another, even when I was spending most of the year doing ballot access work in the past, I’ve never shied away from criticizing any candidates or groups regardless of whether they pay for ballot access work or not. It’s likely that this has cost me some jobs but I’m OK with that. I speak my mind and that’s that, and if I voice any opinion for or against anything you can rest assured that is what I actually think and not based on what benefits me personally.

    *Anyone who questions dubiously libertarian special interests buying LP influence that way. SHUT THE FUCK UP.

    Also demonstrably false. I’ve questioned plenty of groups buying LP influence that way many times.

    Additionally, you’ve provided nothing but baseless speculation that is even happening in this case. It may or may not be but I am not aware of any such buying if it is.

  53. paulie Post author

    The issue is male violence against others. Sure, some trans fear it in men’s rooms. But if they’re attacked they complain and it makes the news.

    Bullshit. Just as with everyone else including gay, lesbian, bi and straight men and women alike, most trans people do not report most assaults, sexual or otherwise. For another, they don’t always survive to make such a report. Furthermore, assaults don’t even have to take place if a not unreasonable fear of them exists. I’ve known trans people personally who literally rarely ever go anywhere in public and/or have medical problems for repeatedly not going to bathrooms for hours when they needed to way too many times. And not just one or two. If there are women experiencing this degree of fear about being attacked by trans women in restrooms, even in the current vastly exaggerated hysteria about trans restroom use, I’ve yet to come across any in real life, and I have known way, way more women than trans people.

    and enough of them aren’t genuine trans but pervs and sex criminals looking for opportunity that women DO have something to worry about.

    As far as I can tell, with extremely rare exceptions that is also total bullshit.

    “Trans” put in women’s shelters and prisons already are being prosecuted for sexually assaulting women.

    How many times? Because it’s actually extremely common for them to be assaulted and even murdered in men’s jails and prisons.

    Let the LGBT community work to create alternate spaces where they are free from violence.

    How does that work when someone is arrested and incarcerated?

    Don’t force the results of male violence on trans to lead to violence against women through allowing woman haters and abusers of whatever kind into women’s private spaces.

    I’ve never seen any evidence that any such problem exists on nearly the scale that male violence on trans people does. But exactly what third alternative are you suggesting if trans women are not put into men’s or women’s facilities? It’s not likely that every jurisdiction would pay for a third set of facilities.

  54. Thomas L. Knapp

    RC,

    You write:

    “I’d suggest that Step Two is to determine whether the issue has reasonable sympathy and/or is not highly alienating to supermajorities of voters.”

    Well, as Shane (Cory, I assume) points out, the key is to identify the voters who are likely to 1) sympathize with the party’s position on the issue and 2) consider the issue important enough that their vote might depend on it, then push message to those voters.

    Voter ID and targeting can be complicated, of course. You might reach the wrong voters with a particular message. For example, when Ron Paul launched his first presidential campaign, the first fundraiser I received was obviously targeted to conservatives. In it, he bragged about his work trying to keep teh gays from marrying, teh women from aborting, and teh furriners from getting in. Not a word on foreign policy, and nothing memorably libertarian about it.

    But (again as Shane points out), it’s getting easier and easier to target particular demographics with web advertising, etc. I would say that to the extent it addresses discrete issues, LPHQ should get better at making sure NRA members hear about the LP’s positions on gun rights, while members and loved ones of the trans community hear about the LP’s positions on gender identity, etc., without too much “message bleed” into other demographics until and unless the issue becomes a matter of loud general debate — at which point, all we can honestly do is run our actual position up the flagpole and advocate for it.

    But whether and how LPHQ opened its mouth on this is a nuts and bolts issue. At least it got the “being right” part right when it DID open its mouth. That’s a start, anyway. And my perception is that LPHQ has been doing a pretty good job on that particular thing for several years now. So now maybe they can start getting better at the targeting and what-not.

  55. robert capozzi

    TK,

    Sure, micro-targeting is possible. It’s also the case that researchers can unearth messaging that was intended for a discrete audience, and to use it against the candidate. I also wonder whether a campaign and a party serve analogous functions.

    It may well be noble to target the pronouncedly oppressed, but I’d think a party should more in the business of scooping up larger subsets of the population with resonant messages.

  56. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Paulie wrote: I’ve never seen any evidence that any such problem exists on nearly the scale that male violence on trans people does.

    CM: Of course not. Violence against women isn’t much of an issue for you so you aren’t on all the lists and groups that provide dozens of examples weekly.

    Paulie wrote: But exactly what third alternative are you suggesting if trans women are not put into men’s or women’s facilities? It’s not likely that every jurisdiction would pay for a third set of facilities.

    CM: As other women helped me see, the LGBTQ community has lots of power to get separate and safer facilities and these already exist even in prisons, if not all of them. But they aren’t after safety, they want 100% acceptance for their ideology, of men with penises being women. (Oh yeah and whatever for transmen too.)

    And they couldn’t give a crap if every convicted force and fraud sex criminal in the country can follow 15 year old girls into the Walmart bathroom just because he says he’s a woman. They don’t care if “accidentally” the perv looks through the stall gap or even flashes their huge “clitorises” while straightening out their stockings in full view of women and girls. Not to mention install cameras, peek over stalls, put cameras under stalls, wipe sperm on toilet paper hoping some 15 year old accidentally gets impregnated, etc etc etc. And then there is the NAMBLA message a certain percentage of them still are pushing, if only playing the long game with it…

    But I guess there aren’t any sex criminals on this list or you would know that’s what sex criminals like to do. And not too many women who share pervert stories with all your girl friends repeatedly through your lives. After all, the cops won’t listen or laugh you off (I mean they don’t even bother to test rape kits half the time), so who else can you tell?

    You’re all such innocents here, aren’t you??

  57. paulie Post author

    Violence against women isn’t much of an issue for you

    Bullshit. Not reading further after that little bit of nonsense. If you have anything that is not anecdotal, feel free to share, otherwise my point still stands.

  58. robert capozzi

    pf: There’s a large subset of the population that cares about justice for more than only themselves.

    me: True, although I wonder how much the indirect care. It’s likely a range.

    In this particular case, defending trans and getting the government out of gender labeling (within reason) is probably a good move overall. It seems timely, and while it could alienate some, it’s not like the LP is pushing some of the more extreme gender-studies ideas, which to me can seem rather loopy. Reaching out to Jenner seems OK to me, although I notice that NS didn’t share the NAPist requirements to become a member in good standing.

    I wonder why? 😉

  59. Jim

    Carol Moore “Wait til some 300 lb weight lifting transman gets in your face telling you he’s a better man than you’ll ever be. Will you wrestle him to prove he’s not? ha ha ha”

    I wouldn’t try to wrestle anyone. I’m not built for it. I’d keep my distance, use a lot of quick, targeted strikes, and wait for him to tire out. Big guys tend to tire quickly. Then do some harder strikes. 20-25 years ago I did enough of the physical sports (football, karate, jujitsu, and informally the basics of boxing), that I’m not at all afraid of the big guys. It’s the guys who are faster than me that I’d worry about. I’ve got 9″ and 60 lbs on Bruce Lee, but that dude had god tier speed. There’s no way to beat that. “Speed kills” isn’t just for highway safety.

    Bruce Lee developed his speed early by practicing Wing Chun which, according to legend, was developed by women, for women.

  60. Seebeck

    As usual, Moore, you haven’t learned to not put words in people’s mouths. That’s one of many reasons you are considered to be battier than Carlsbad Caverns at sunset.

    So Seebeck…
    ** thinks the LP should take a stand on every controversial scientific, sociological and ideological idea pushed by special interest groups that might vote for it? or just the noisy monied ones?

    No, you idiot. Where you get that out of what I actually stated on this *political issue* is somewhere in your land of cuckoo.

    * doesn’t think the LP should emphasize the right of individuals to be free of force and fraud by individuals and private and public entities??

    Again, reading comprehension is your friend. What I stated above was that the LP need to talk about *impacts in everyday lives,* not abstracts in libertarian philosophy. People relate to the “What’s in it for me?” far more than pure ideology.

    * doesn’t think LP should oppose government funding to impose ideological, religious, economic and political positions ???

    Irrelevant to the situation. Besides, unless you’ve been under your rock for the past several eons, and maybe you have, government funds do support imposition of ideological, religious, economic, and political positions. That’s called “business as usual.”

    * didn’t notice I mentioned the right of free association and the anti-libertarian nature of anti-discrimination laws, only noting that I didn’t clearly differentiate between govt and private discrimination under Title IX????

    Oh, I noticed, but you missed the fact that the issue in question had nothing to do with anything other than Title IX, and the release didn’t mention it either, and THAT was what I was pointing out. Again, reading comprehension is your friend.

    * didn’t note that I made some reference to that in noting that libertarians disagree on government policies on “identity politics” – aka discrimination – issues like sex and ethnic quota numbers in legislative or government service positions????

    Again, the issue at question is Title IX, not everything. Again, context matters, and again, reading comprehension is your friend.

    My critique of the release stands. Yours of me, however, is utter garbage, as usual.

    P.S. You’re no gatekeeper of libertarian ideology, either. You’re simply a hyperliberal feminist who thinks she’s libertarian, but in fact is simply nuts. That’s why nobody takes you seriously and you’re considered a sad joke in real libertarian circles.

  61. paulie Post author

    Jim @ 7:22 pm: exactly.

    Robert @ 7:25 pm: seems to have lost the thread? My response was in reply to why “NAPist requirements to become a member in good standing” aren’t a normal part of the sales pitch. Funnel model is get a lot of people in the door then work on them while they are inside. Some will harden over time, some will take other paths, some of which will accrue to our benefit. If done consistently there are in fact results over time, as the movement and party keep growing. You may disagree and we can certainly be frustrated at the pace but I don’t see a better path forward. It’s worked for other movements over time.

    If you mean trans issue in particular is a microscoping opening, also disagreed. Taken in isolation yes, but it’s a leading edge issue on the social issue front, a useful separator from conservatives on social issues, the right thing to do, niche marketing, and an appeal to civil liberties/civil rights supporters all at the same time.

    Seebeck @ 8:55 am is essentially correct on substantive points, but I would hope for a more civil or polite tone in our discussions here, even if the kindness is not always warranted. I acknowledge I don’t always live up to it but I try. I doubt this gentle reminder will do any good, since Seebeck dislikes me. Hopefully it will do someone some good here.

  62. Thomas L. Knapp

    RC,

    “It may well be noble to target the pronouncedly oppressed, but I’d think a party should more in the business of scooping up larger subsets of the population with resonant messages.”

    It’s not about nobility, it’s about what works.

    TARGET AUDIENCE A: Already gets everything it wants from one of the two currently dominant parties, and has the other currently dominant party fighting to be the one more convincingly offering it everything it wants.

    TARGET AUDIENCE B: Neither gets what it wants from either of the two currently dominant parties, nor has either of those two parties trying to convincingly offer it what it wants.

    Which one of those audiences should a “resonant message” be targeted at by a third competitor entering the market?

    No one is going to compete with Coke or Pepsi by offering a similar cola at a similar price point (in the case of politics, the price being a vote). Anyone hoping to compete with Coke or Pepsi is going to have to offer a flavor for which there’s an unserved or underserved market, and hope it can both capture that market and, over time, attract enough positive attention from cola drinkers to start peeling them away and to CinnamonBerry PunchFizzCocktail, too.

  63. robert capozzi

    TK,

    Works? Really? Extremist positioning has gotten the LP where lo these many decades? If anything, backward. When moderate lessarchism was ascendant in the early 80s, there were 3 elected Ls in the AK state legislature. Since the NAPist recapture in 84, inreach-ery and plumbline policing has stalled and reversed the hard-fought progress. The Teens may represent a return to sanity, but the jury remains out.

  64. dL

    moderate lessarchism

    I will give odds that more people would support Gender self-determination over moderate lessarchism. To support something you first have know what the fuck the the thing is. Outside of Bob’s head, maybe only a handful of people know what the hell that term refers to. Most people would probably think that it is some kind of medical condition. I’m guessing .0000005% would support contracting something not covered by their insurance deductible.

  65. paulie Post author

    Most people would probably think that it is some kind of medical condition. I’m guessing .0000005% would support contracting something not covered by their insurance deductible.

    LOL. Moderate to severe lessarchism? 🙂

  66. Thomas L. Knapp

    RC,

    Trying to pull the old switcharoo as usual, I see . We weren’t talking about “extremist positioning,” we were talking about “targeting the pronouncedly oppressed.”

  67. robert capozzi

    TK,

    NAPists tend to target the pronouncedly oppressed with extremist positioning. They go together.

  68. Freeman

    Carol Moore said,
    “Libertarians should not let our principles be watered down by layers of pandering rhetoric.”

    Words to live by. Shed the euphemisms and buzzwords of folks who want big government.

  69. Thomas L. Knapp

    “NAPists tend to target the pronouncedly oppressed with extremist positioning. They go together.”

    Nice pivot from moving the goalposts to sending in your burning straw man to try for the field goal.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *