Rep. Eugene Vindman came to a predominantly Republican Virginia county Tuesday night expecting to tell local Democrats why they needed to help him win reelection and put their party back in control of Congress. Instead, the first-term Democrat spent much of his visit defending himself to transgender members of his own party before leaving after a profane confrontation with a constituent.

At least two transgender women and one transgender man challenged Vindman over his May vote for GOP-backed legislation affecting transgender students. Some described being outed to unsupportive parents. Others questioned why transgender people should trust Democrats to protect them when members of the party sometimes support Republican measures targeting them.

  • PRIMEcavitationfetishist@quokk.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Yes I may kill some of you, but I NEED to sacrifice you for basically no gain! You don’t understand! You’re basically committing suicide if you won’t let me throw you under this bus!

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Holy shit his twin brother is the Vindman who stood up for Ukraine in the first impeachment.

    Well. I hope Eugene gets his shit together. His opponent is

    Ollivant is a retired Army officer who served as the National Security Council director for Iraq during the George W. Bush administration. He worked as a national security analyst and consultant after that.

    Iraq under Gee Dubz. That’s a stench.

  • Corvidae@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Kids begin puberty as early as 9 or 10 and complete it as late as 17 (years of age). This entire time their gender identities are under their parents control?

    • fonix232@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 hours ago

      And in some cases even earlier. IIRC there was a study a few years back about how there’s a very visible tendency of the average age of puberty has dropped significantly in the past 100 years - specifically, measured in average age of first menstruation, which was as high as 16-17 in the mid-1800s, dropped to around 14.5-15 by 1920, and further dropped to around 12 by the 1980s, and latest data, based on the UK NHS reports from 2010, now put the average at 10.5.

      Now, I won’t get into conspiracy theory regions as to WHY it’s happening (to my knowledge none of the theories, let them be based on reality or conspiracies, have been actually confirmed to a level where the scientific community is comfortable pointing fingers), but it is happening.

      And a very interesting aspect of this is the legal framework. The age of majority - which is often tied to the age of consent, as well as the age of full bodily autonomy (sans edge cases where the person doesn’t have the mental capacity to make autonomous decisions) - has stayed relatively static at 18 for the past ~200 years, while the closest related biological event, puberty et al, in ~160 years has dropped over 1/3, or nearly 6 years… Basically, 160 years ago you entered puberty, and a year or two later you were considered an adult, able to make life altering decisions. Today, you go through puberty, and might still need to wait 5-6 years to be an adult…

      Now don’t get me wrong, put the pitchforks down, I’m not one of those weirdos who wants to lower the age of consent. I’m just pointing out that biology has changed over the course of some 8 generations or even less, and our legal code regarding a lot of things affected by puberty has stayed rigid.

      And that just doesn’t sit well with me. 160 years ago, we considered kids a year or two after hitting puberty to be grownups, even though they would’ve learned maybe 1/10 by that time that today we get taught in the first 4-6 years of school. Yet today, with much more learning about every single topic, including human sexuality et al, we don’t consider these human beings capable of explaining to a specialist that they’re feeling body dysphoria, that they feel more comfortable in a gender role different than the one assigned with their birth sex? It’s not even making a unilateral decision, it’s not “mum I wanna be a girl”, it’s them explaining to a medical professional how they’re not feeling comfortable in their own bodies!

      This just further reinforces my belief that the current approach to politics - which dictates regulations like trans people accessing appropriate care at the right ages - simply doesn’t work. We keep electing old farts whom are simply detached from reality, having them debate topics they don’t understand, ignore their constituents.

    • keiko@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      13 hours ago

      “Kids can’t consent to puberty blockers cuz it’s a big decision without permanent bodily changes.”

      “Kids’ consent doesn’t matter when it comes to puberty, which has permanent bodily changes.”

      From my limited experience talking to people against puberty blockers, first of all, they never remember the first part, that blockers are reversible and that the whole point is that they’re temporary and don’t leave permanent bodily changes. They always forget that aspect. That’s not relevant to their concerns. What makes them firm in their position is that they say it’s to protect kids from making the wrong decision.

      (same thing they tell full-grown adults as to why we all need some random stranger’s permission before we’re allowed anything in the way of medical transition, to “protect” us from ourselves. indefinitely infantilized regardless of age.)

      It doesn’t matter how many times the suicide rates are brought up or how they’re arguing for the protection of hypothetical cisgender kids who somehow accidentally go through transition as a result of being allowed blockers, at the cost of real transgender kids who can and do advocate for themselves only to be told no. Nothing changes these people. Because they would honestly rather that lots of trans kids die if it means they could possibly “save” even one cisgender kid from accidentally transitioning (which again, is not what blockers are for). They view trans people as lesser and a worthy sacrifice so as to save someone from being transgender.

      I hope that was coherent enough, I’m tired, in many ways. have some trans: 🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️

      edited to make it slightly less annoying to read here, have some more trans: 🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️

    • OwOarchist@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      18 hours ago

      In the conservative mindset, any person under 18 is the property of their parents, which they can do whatever the fuck they want with.

        • SnoopSqueak@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Yes. Physical abuse is legal in all 50 states.

          After decades of mistreatment, when a person can finally live independently, they are ill-equipped to do so as a result of being mistreated. The parents face no consequences. The children’s lives are forever damaged.

    • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Hell I hit it at 8. Mind you it may have been a stress response to my whole fucken existence at the time but it hit like a truck regardless. Had a shitty little stache at 12.