As usual the problem is the intransigence of left-wing "trans-rights defenders," not the legal and physical threats of right-wing trans-rights attackers. There is no such thing as a "compromise position" on gender-affirming care. The existing system is already extremely conservative!
I don’t know what the compromise is supposed to be between “trans people should be allowed to exist” and “trans people should not be allowed to exist.”
99.5% of GMC members support trans healthcare, but Cass still sets the legislation.
By “compromise” he means “tolerate a higher death count”
I have family members who are susceptible to anti-trans positions inasmuch as they hear "kids getting surgeries" and are aghast. When I reframe it as "allowing doctors and patients to make decisions based on their unique circumstances instead of a blanket age rule" people realize it is good.
So gross.
I think part of the reason there is no polling on whether prisoners -who by definition are held on an involuntary basis in the custody of the state- should arbitrarily be denied medical care is because until a couple years ago, it was widely acknowledged that doing so constitutes "torture"
Chait has the talent necessary to be a mediocre sci-fi writer instead of a liability to political writing itself. I don't know why so many writers never discover the existence of fiction.
It was already seriously a compromise position from day one
what an incredible sentence to write. "god, these ~activists~ are so unwilling to compromise on _defending people's rights_!" do you HEAR yourself??
Gee if only there were recent elections where we could test whether anti-trans stuff is a political winner: 19thnews.org/2022/11/midt...
This year saw an underwhelming showing for anti-LGBTQ candidates and historic wins for LGBTQ nominees.