Go fuck yourself.

And the conservatives scaremongering about this are definitely good faith actors who aren’t just scaremongering and harassing a tiny minority of trans athletes who do not in fact represent some massive social problem that requires national level obsession with targeting and identifying trans people to harass, with Gavin Newsom hanging around with a fascist saying “yassss besty” as he literally directly refers to a specific trans athlete to target and harass them.

Another example of misplaced blame would be concerns that trans women have too much testosterone or that trans men are gaining an unfairly advantage by taking testosterone (8, 11, 56, 127). Herein lies the myth that cis men, not on gender affirming hormone therapy, will claim to be a trans women to win at female sporting events. However, trans individuals use gender affirming hormone therapy to better match their gender identity, not to gain unfair sporting advantages (132). While it is true that certain morphological changes that occur during puberty may be irreversible, trans individuals on gender affirming hormone therapy clearly do not retain the same physiologic parameters as their pre-transition counterparts (12, 15, 16, 54–56, 129). It is unclear to what extent, or for how long, any hormone mediated advantages may persist once a trans individual begins regular gender affirming hormone therapy (12, 15, 53, 56, 129). It has been shown that parameters affecting aerobic performance transition more quickly than those affecting strength performance (16, 127, 129). However, excluding trans individuals does not prevent cases of athletes having hormonal advantages. The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) found 93 of the 4,422 athletes tested (2.1%) to have “adverse analytical finding” for steroid use (105). WADA does not report how many of those athletes were cis or trans, however, as transgender individuals are underrepresented in athletics, it is likely that these are cis athletes (60). Besides use of exogenous hormones, cisgender individuals naturally vary in their hormonal profiles (40, 59, 66, 133). Thus, restricting trans individuals is unlikely to prevent issues of ergogenic hormonal advantages in sports.

Finally, it is well known that within sports and athletics, competitive advantage is in large part influenced by genetic predisposition (121, 134, 135). It is accepted that some individuals are born with natural advantages, however, the suggestion that trans individuals may enjoy some advantage in certain cases is regarded as unacceptable. Yet there does not seem to be a domination of sports by trans athletes if their advantage is so great. When examining issues that allegedly arise by trans athletes’ participation in sports and athletics, the solutions are more driven by a political/cultural divide rather than an honest attempt to actually mitigate inequities or risk of injuries that are occurring (1, 136).

[…]

Individuals should not have to make a choice between being their authentic selves or being athletes (138). While trans athletes competing in various sports and athletic events raises interesting considerations of how certain morphologic and physiologic factors affect performance, these questions are not exclusive to trans individuals. There are wide variations within cisgender populations, even when excluding individuals with differences in sexual development (121, 139). It is expected that about 2.3% of a normally distributed population is likely to fall above two standard deviations from a population mean. These exceptional individuals may be those who are gifted and excel at some sport or athletic performance (121, 135, 140). In contrast only 0.5%–0.6% of the population identify as trans (60). There is no concern for restricting individuals who are exceptionally large or small, those who are genetically gifted, or those with differing hormone concentrations or muscle mass, so long as their gender and biologic sex align (120, 121). The disproportionate focus on the relatively small portion of the population who are trans seems based on the belief that cis men, who cannot succeed in sports among other cis men, would choose to misidentify as trans women to gain an advantage in sports against cis women. However, there are no legitimate cases of this occurring. An individual’s sex does not determine their success or failure at any athletic event despite the high level of competition. This can be demonstrated when looking at not average outcomes, but the level of overlap among outcomes. The exclusion of trans individuals also insults the skill and athleticism of both cis and trans athletes. While sex differences do develop following puberty, many of the sex differences are reduced, if not erased, over time by gender affirming hormone therapy. Finally, if it is found that trans individuals have advantages in certain athletic events or sports; in those cases, there will still be a question of whether this should be considered unfair, or accepted as another instance of naturally occurring variability seen in athletes already participating in these events.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10641525/

There is no legitimate debate. It’s scaremongering.

But sure, “complicated issues” requires paling around with a fascist like Charlie Kirk and talking about how he’s correct, backing down immediately when challenged on using “weaponize” to accurately describe conservative attacks on trans people and being asked to target and harass specific trans athletes based on nothing.

Just like “complicated issues” requires reaffirming conservative framing of immigration and adopting language about how immigrants are stealing welfare money and smuggling gangs requires further militarisation of borders and out of country processing of immigrants.

You’re the useful idiot that the thin end of the wedge is for.

The 3 sample bullets are vapid and meaningless at best. “Not being ashamed of your country” = stop talking about and stop doing anything about racism and sexism and bigotry. “own the failures of Democratic governance in large cities” has no detail, but it’s Third Way so that will be “immigrants are bad and we need more homeless sweeps and subsidies and tax cuts for businesses”.

See e.g.

Advocate for middle-class tax cuts, support public education, and propose spending cuts where needed.

Tax and budget cuts but somehow support public education.

Democrats need to stop demonizing wealth and corporations broadly.

Literally some of the most broadly popular rhetoric and language but this is the one they feel the need to not do.

Engage with small businesses, business podcasts, podcasts like “Earn Your Leisure” that reach the aspiring class, and entrepreneurs to discuss economic policies

Hand over even more of democratic policy to the rich and upper classes while claiming to stand up for working people somehow.

5. Be Pro-Aspiration & Pro-Capitalism in a Smart Way

• Recognize that working-class voters value upward mobility and economic success.
• Have a prosperity gospel aimed at the working class.
• Call out corporate abuses individually instead of attacking “corporations” as a whole.

Meaningless drivel that is largely what Democrats are already doing.

Use messengers that working-class voters trust—business leaders, skilled laborers, and community figures.

lmao business leaders.

But they’ll do it all with a big hat and a folksy accent hootin’ and hollerin’ at a gun show this time.

In a perfect world, people would stop feeling the need to redirect every criticism of Democrats into pointing out how someone else must be worse, and maybe realise Democrats as they exist and as the party is structured is an almost useless vehicle for any meaningful change or opposition.

In a perfect world, liberals would stop idealising Democrats in the way they did in the post I was responding to, where they implied the Democratic alternative would save lives, after that party literally full throatedly endorsed genocide right up until they lost the election (and still do).

The thread is talking about how it ought to be acceptable to criticise the Democratic party, and the reality of what you’re doing is needlessly deflecting back to Republicans in a context in which it’s irrelevant.

What the fuck are you on about? What do you think you’re responding to?

Democrats were saving lives by bombing children in Gaza.

I’ve changed it, but Nitter sites have often been incredibly unreliable in my experience. Not much use in a url if it breaks randomly, so I also put the original link in the main post just in case.

I’ve changed it and added original link in the post in case nitter instance fails/people want original url.

Literally in the post you’re responding on:

I also remind dipshit Democrat defenders to hold Democrats to account. They ran a failed election campaign. They decided adhering to genocide was more important than winning. This is how they respond to their base expecting literally anything of them, is to resent them and tell them to shut the fuck up and plead there isn’t anything they can do so they just have to roll over.

What is it with you fucking morons who incessantly turn every criticism of the Demcoratic party into some insane notion that purely by virtue of existing they are owed votes? That’s not how politics works. That’s not how election campaigns work. Also, do do you think the organisations doing this didn’t campaign for Democrats? Do you have any reading comprehension?

You did nothing. Now, this is what you get.

Liberals and wishing harm on others when they fail.

“You did nothing” Did you phonebank? Did you go canvassing at all? Did you deliver or distribute campaign material? Did you incessantly post online enough about how it’s your duty to vote Democrat, the most significant and important contribution to every election campaign?

No? Oh, you’re just still whining months after the fact that because you saw liberal orgs that actually did campaign for Democrats are not satisfied with how Democrats are responding to Republicans and the excuses they keep making?

Well, this is what you get. Clearly you just didn’t want it enough.

lmao like the projected assumptions I was from the US and voted in the election?

Again, did you think you were doing something that the 100+ comments in this thread hadn’t already litigated, fucking moron?

I am talking about a decision you made, as an individual

Jesus christ you’re a fucking moron. I’m not American. I can’t vote in US elections. I’m from the UK. I didn’t vote for Labour because they were also endorsing genocide. They still won the election.

What good was your principled stand? What on Earth was improved? What harm was minimized? Pounding the table about how bad things already were doesn’t change that they are now worse.

Why do you not ask those questions of Democratic party and its leadership, people who have actual power compared to random nobodies asked to tick a box once every 4 years?

What good was your principled stand (materially supporting and endorsing genocide)? What harm was minimised (murdering tens of thousands of Palestinians to defend Israel from consequences)? Pounding the table about how bad things are doesn’t change the way they keep getting worse (Democrats keep doubling down on genocide and being more racist, regardless of if they win or lose, and never change strategy).

What the fuck are you on?

The Israeli army intensively bombarded residential areas in Gaza when it lacked intelligence on the exact location of Hamas commanders hiding underground, and intentionally weaponized toxic byproducts of bombs to suffocate militants in their tunnels, an investigation by +972 Magazine and Local Call can reveal.

The investigation, based on conversations with 15 Israeli Military Intelligence and Shin Bet officers who have been involved in tunnel-targeting operations since October 7, exposes how this strategy aimed to compensate for the army’s inability to pinpoint targets in Hamas’ subterranean tunnel network. When targeting senior commanders in the group, the Israeli military authorized the killing of “triple-digit numbers” of Palestinian civilians as “collateral damage,” and maintained close real-time coordination with U.S. officials regarding the expected casualty figures.

Some of these strikes, which were the deadliest in the war and often used American bombs, are known to have killed Israeli hostages despite concerns raised ahead of time by military officers. Moreover, the lack of precise intelligence meant that in at least three major strikes, the army dropped several 2,000-pound bunker-buster bombs that killed scores of civilians — part of a strategy known as “tiling” — without succeeding in killing the intended target.

[…]

Israel’s efforts to maximize the chances of killing senior militants hiding underground also included attempts to crush parts of a tunnel network and trap the targets inside. Sources described incidents where vehicles fleeing an attack site were bombed without specific intelligence about who was inside, based on the assumption that a senior Hamas figure might be trying to escape.

“The entire region felt and heard the explosions,” Abdel Hadi Okal, a Palestinian journalist from Jabalia who witnessed several major Israeli bombing operations — which Palestinians often refer to as “fire belts” — during the early weeks of the war, told +972 and Local Call. “Entire residential blocks were targeted with heavy missiles, causing buildings to collapse and fall on top of each other. Ambulances and Civil Defense vehicles were unable to contend with the scale of the bombardment, so people had to use their hands and some light equipment to pull bodies from under the rubble of houses. There was no possibility for anyone to survive.”

https://www.972mag.com/tunnels-hamas-lethal-gas-bombs-gaza/

If you cared about Palestinians, you’d have supported the uncommitted movement a year ago. Instead, you’re here wasting everyones time lashing out at randoms on the internet because the Democrats campaign failed due to their own choices.

Did you even bother to look at the 100+ comments already in this thread, to realise you’re just the same as the other fucking morons who think random people on the internet criticising Democrats are the ones solely responsible for the Democrats losing the election? That it was their fault Democrats refused to move from endorsing genocide?

Lol. Come on now, don’t be deliberately obtuse.

Referencing a fact is not being obtuse, nor is referencing Trumps lead negotiator, who literally directly credited Bidens team as “doing most of the work” on the ceasefire. Pretty much everyone has recognised it came out in the end as a joint effort, aside from Trump himself.

Ok. I don’t know how many times I have to tell Yanks that actions are more important than words.

I’m not a yank, and the actions are the multiple murders Israel has already committed of Palestinians in breach of the ceasefire, the fact that all of Trumps appointees are obscenely pro-Israel well beyond even Biden, that everyone involved is saying the aim is still to eliminate Hamas and the war is not going to end, and they are literally right now planning for a takeover of Gaza and the West Bank by Israel and the US.

Like what are you even arguing at this point? That Israel is genuinely going to stop ethnically cleansing Palestinians? That Trump cares to stop them? That his appointees care to stop them? Are you lost and confused and think I’m defending Biden on Israel?

The ceasefire started before Trump took office, and regardless, both effectively mean the same thing when they refer to a ceasefire. A pause before they both continue to ethnically cleanse Palestinians.

Apologies, it came across as sarcastic but in the direction of defending DNC.

Cool that people making a principled stand to engage with a political party to encourage a change in policy are at fault for the leaders of that political party refusing to change policy, despite being told at multiple levels, for a multitude of reasons, including electorally, why that policy was bad.

Liberals hate democracy. Expecting to engage with a political party to affect change? Ew, just tick the box with a D next to it regardless of what they do or say. Don’t you know trying to engage with a party that doesn’t listen to its base or membership might lead to bad PR and might hurt them in an election? How could you be so inconsiderate? Your role is just to sit down and do nothing and accept whatever they say is true on MSNBC.

Because Democrats have done nothing to pressure him into changing his position, and Democrats like Fetterman have absolutely been at the forefront of all the attempts to blame people who cared about Palestinians enough to try and get Democrats to change policy for their campaign and policy failures.

I’m sorry, but no, you do not have to hand it to 'em.

Trumps ceasefire is the same as Bidens. A temporary pause before Israel decides to resume it’s ethnic cleansing of Gaza and The West Bank. He will support them to the same or greater degree as Biden. Everyone he’s appointed directly refers to Israel controlling Gaza and the West Bank from now on, having just announced they want Palestinians to “voluntarily” leave.

Biden and the democrats can get fucked, but you don’t have to be a moron and double down on Trump being somehow better. He isn’t.