politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
So universities are about to go 0-2 in the fight against a Trump takeover.
Columbia bent the knee almost immediately. It'll be interesting to see how long UPenn holds out.
Just pointing out that UPenn is his alma mater. He went to the Warton School of Business and one of his professors called Trump the dumbest student he ever had.
Well that probably explains why he decided to randomly pick on UPenn. He doesn't care about the trans athletes. His fee-fees were hurt.
The funniest thing is that the Warton School was one of the first Ivies to get serious about computers. Before they had a separate computer department it was all part of Warton School. With his daddy's money Trump could have ended up hiring Steve Jobs and Bill Gates, but that would have required a tiny amount of brain cells
They should rescind his degree.
Why do you think that Columbia was "fighting" trump in the first place. They had been trying to deport and ban criticism of Israel for decades, they finally had the opportunity and they are glad of it.
I wouldn't really call it bending the knee. Schools offer services to students and while making the statement (that trans people are still people) is important denying services to hundreds if not thousands of students (due to lack of funding) who may or may not agree with that position just to make the statement isn't responsible as an institution.
I absolutely agree with their attempt to stand up for students rights, and I also agree with their turnaround. There's a significant and nonzero chance that they could have hurt students even inadvertently by losing that funding and it was responsible of them to think of the entire student body even though the message is very important.
"First they came for the socialists" yada yada.
It's nice to be privileged so you can ignore the sufferings of others, but eventually it will reach everyone.
This is such a pathetic cop-out reply it's not even funny. As if every single person with the opinion that Universities shouldn't, to the detriment of the entire student body, unilaterally decide for everyone who attends where their political beliefs should be absolutely must be privileged.
You don't have to believe that transgenderism is wrong to believe that students should be the ones to decide if they feel that it's right for genetic men to participate in women's sports. It needs to be up to the students, and not the institutions to make that a policy. The University itself has no right to make that policy without the consent of the students in the same way they shouldn't and couldn't be allowed to segregate students based on race.
I support trans rights, because I support human rights. It's not privileged to believe that a public institution has no right to decide the social zeitgeist for the student body--they have no right deciding what is or isn't acceptable.
Human rights are not up to discussion or vote. It's not the university or any institution that decide on that, they just have to ensure they are respected.
That's actually exactly how a democratic republic works.. Why you think that's not the case is a little concerning.
In a democracy you're allowed to have dissenting opinions. There are people out there that don't believe kids deserve school lunches. I personally think that's fucked up, but for me to have my freedoms, ideals and opinions, I have to concede that private citizens also have the freedom to think kids don't deserve school lunches.
That's how it works.
Lol you really need these universities, maybe someday you'll get to attend one of them
Lol no. That's just majority rule.
Democracy has a list of necessary prerequisites in the form of rights and duties. How is it democratic for the majority to be able to vote to kill the rest?
I'm not discussing anymore with someone who doesn't have a basic grasp of the concepts.
Do you know what "human right" means?
And you do know that countries come together to vote on what a "human right" is, right? Because it doesn't seem like it. What a human right is, and what you seem to think it is, are two entirely different things.
GOOD point. Only your opinion is the correct one.
Slavery was perfectly legal according to the votes at that time.
I'm a constitution loving leftist. I've never voted red. My brother is trans, and trans rights is particularly important to me.
But again, whatever you need to tell yourself to sleep at night because it's simply unconscionable to you that someone can advocate for someone's rights that doesn't show up on your "acceptable groups of people" list. It always blows my mind away that people who pretend to be so enlightened think nothing of denying the rights of others when the marginalized groups they pretend to represent know all too well what that feels like.
Other people don't stop having rights simply because you do, and vice versa. All rights must be protected, even the ones you find repugnant, or we all lose rights. It's the foundational cornerstone of our democracy, the constitution, and history.
But I guess we'll just gloss over that because I said "other people also have rights" and you interpret that to be transphobic...somehow.
My brother, born a woman, transitioned. The only one that has called him a woman has been you and if you were standing in front of me I would have already made your face completely flat for it. You have this so incredibly backwards it's actually fucked up to watch. You don't know me. You only know what you've convinced yourself that you know about me which is absolutely nothing.
The one who shows they don't know what human rights are, is you. Human rights are not universal. They change from country to country. Countries literally sit down and vote on what they believe is and is not a human right.
Almost everything that you've said in any of your replies start to finish has been fucked up, a misunderstanding on your behalf, or a complete and total fabrication.
People have a constitutional right to the freedom of expression. If a bigot wants to protest black people in a public place they have every right to do that. That's not me defending their actions that's me literally pointing out that they have the right to do that and you do not have the right to take that right away from them simply because you have disagree with it. I'm so sick and tired of watching little children like yourself run around and act like they're such forward-thinkers and they're so pro-rights while simultaneously not acknowledging that even people you disagree with have rights.
You're not half as good a person as you think you are, you're absolutely not as open-minded as you believe yourself to be and you're probably less than a third as smart as you think you are.
Go ahead and point out at any time where that was said by anyone but you.
You've somehow gotten it into your head that I'm anti-trans, or supporting anti-trans, which is stupid. I'm a civil rights activist. I advocate for people's rights--and I understand that you don't "give" people rights. You have to make people realize who think that group of people don't have rights that they actually do. And you can't get to that point by saying "your rights don't matter here" and letting universities do the same.
For you to have rights, xenophobics and transphobics have to have rights. For you to express your opinion, you have to be willing to let the xenophobics and transphobics have their pullpit, too. That's the way it works. You are free to say "their opinion doesn't matter!" but you're not winning any hearts and minds and least of all not winning any court cases with that attitude.
Every single reply I've had in this thread is an emotional response because people seem to be under the very mistaken impression that I'm anti-trans or advocating for anti-trans rhetoric, and that's simply not true. I'm advocating for all rights, not just trans rights. People are empowered by the constitution to be racist in the same way they're empowered by the constitution to be trans. You don't get to pick and choose and that's always--literally 100% of the time--worth pointing out. Ultimately it needs to be up to the students to be okay with trans or not be okay with trans. Institutions shouldn't be involved at all.
That's the reasonable discourse of a democracy.
I understand your rationale. And in fact, in 99% of circumstances I begrudgingly agree with it. Sometimes, you have to do what's right for the greater good even if you know it might hurt a few people in the process. But this is not one of those times. And it's not even because of the specific issues being raised (Protests at Columbia, trans athletes at UPenn, etc.).
The reason I'm against it is because by so quickly bending the knee for Trump on these issues is that you're telling your students, community, and alumni that the principles you claim to stand for are up for bid. You're in favor of trans rights -- until trans rights start actually costing you money. You're in favor of the rights of students to protest -- until it effects your funding. What happens when a school promotes support of LGBT issues and then comes in the crosshairs of the Trump Hate Machine? "Sorry guys, but we've gotta kick all the gays out. Trump threatened to pull $100 million in funding if we don't."? Where do you draw the line?
It's one thing to expect that of a regular business. Neither your local mom & pop store nor Wal-Mart are expected to be champions of our freedoms and hold such an important place in our society. Even if I strongly disagree with their decisions, I can understand if they follow where the political and financial winds are blowing. But universities are a completely different beast and play a completely different role in our society.
I also agree, however, you can't unilaterally hurt he student body regardless of their beliefs. They also have rights which need and deserve to be protected. Some students might not agree with the official stance of the University and that's a problem. In the end you're playing with their future too.
It would be different if the entirety of the student body stood up and said "We support this!" no one would have any ground to stand on. But this isn't a "majority rules" type of situation. The school cannot unilaterally make a political stance at the detriment of all students regardless of the student bodies political beliefs. It's just not appropriate for a public institution to do. They have every right and absolutely should support all of their students. And they should do that by making a non-gendered league for their trans students or any other students who want to participate, to participate in. Then no one would be able to bitch.
But you have transgender females who were born male, who had the benefit of a decade or more of testosterone to build lean muscle mass that other female athletes don't have. It's literally the same affect as doping and they don't see it as fair--and if you take the argument at face value, it's not so crack pot as to not merit discussion.
Everyone has the right to participate in sports. Male, female, lemur, panda, whatever. The question is, is do genetic men have the right to participate in female sports.
I totally agree. But not everyone feels the same.
You also don't stop them by saying "your disgusting and your opinion doesn't matter."
Everything you're saying here is an emotional response to this issue. You're not helping anyone, you're not objectively looking at the problem. You just want to curtail the rights of those you don't agree with and bolster those that you do. And that's dangerous because it's exactly what the trans hating people want to do too, but somehow it's right for you to do but bad for them to do it in your eyes when in fact its wrong for both of you to do...
The paradox of tolerance is tolerating intolerance can lead to the erosion of tolerance itself. I'm perfectly cognizant of what you're trying to say, and what your meaning is and I can tell by your replies that you've not only not read what I've said (or don't understand it), but you're entirely misrepresenting what I have said.
You're under the entirely mistaken impression that I'm being tolerant of those who are being intolerant because I'm not calling for their heads on pikes. Being anti-trans is intolerant and I believe that pushing back against them is worth doing and necessary for a society. But acknowledging that, according to the US constitution, these intolerant people have the right to be intolerant in the same way that trans people have the right to be trans, isn't being tolerant of the intolerant. It's pointing out that our most supreme law of the land affords these people this right and attempting to curtail that right is in violation of those rights and is unconstitutional in the same way its unconstitutional to attempt to curtail the rights of trans.
I've said exactly two things in the entirety of all my replies here;
Personally I would hope that wouldn't be the case. I would think that the younger generation have a good head on their shoulders and would see that trans rights are human rights. But you can't force that ideology onto people. Recognizing people have a right to be intolerant isn't siding with them, nor is it feeding into a tolerance paradox. I can still call them assholes and bigots while simultaneously recognizing their right to be repugnant.
I understand your arguments and I reject the conclusions you've drawn.
Sure, all people have rights and their rights must be respected. However, some people are misusing their rights to, in effect, erode and negate other's rights. In such an event, that behavior needs to be checked/curtailed by the societal groups around them, and, failing this, at an institutional level. Allowing that behavior to spread inevitably leads to an erosion of all human rights, which must be prevented.
What you're doing is effectively pardoning that behavior by reinforcing their rights, letting them have a platform to continue to spread toxic and negative ideology, and refusing the university in curtailing their bad-faith behavior. The university can, and should, continue to allow trans athletes to compete, and should stand up to a government that tries to erode trans/human rights. Full stop.
Some behaviors are simply unacceptable, and preventing that behavior is not synonymous with restricting rights.
I'm not a legislative body, so I can't pardon anyone.
Female students have a right to a safe space free from genetic males--trans females. Prioritizing trans females ignores current female athletes' concerns. Which is the core issue.
You can't negate students' rights for inclusivity. Gendered leagues are, by definition, gendered. Schools can't legally curtail student rights to accommodate others, regardless of feelings about transgenderism. Some athletes oppose competing with trans individuals, and their rights have to also be respected.
This is a desegregation moment. Like the South's defense of segregated schools, gender-separated sports are being used to exclude. The Civil Rights movement shifted focus to Black students' right to public education. You have to shift the focus from a never-ending fight about rights to desegregate collegiate sports. Mixing gender-separated sports with transgenderism is untenable. Eliminate gendered sports; a level playing field removes grounds for opposition. It's the only sensible solution.
Replace "trans students" with "black students" in your justification and ask yourself if you still believe doing what is good for the majority (not "the entirety") is the most important directive.
This is exactly how fascism works. "First they came for..." and all.
Firstly, they're not the same. Pretending that they are is beyond disingenuous. Secondly, segregation affected all institutions in a state. University, primary, public, private. Everything. This doesn't. It affects a single University and not even the direct student body--only those who participate in sports. It's also not segregate in nature--no one is saying "trans students can't attend school here" they're saying "only genetic females should count as female athletes."
You don't need to layer more shit on the question until you can justify yourself, just answer the question. If UPenn was told to stop black people from playing sports, would you think it was correct and good for UPenn to conform because most of their students are not black athletes?
Since you won't acknowledge your red herring even after it being specifically pointed out I just have to operate under the assumption that you're being disingenuous purposefully. Since no discourse can even be had here because that's not your intention to begin with, why would I continue this?
It's pretty obvious that you disagree, and that's fine. I'll flip the script and shoot you a non-red herring in return but I'm really not going to bother responding, because I don't feel like you're here for any reason other than to wag your finger on your high horse at others perfectly reasonable opinions;
Do you believe that UPenn has the right to expel students who protest the war in Gaza? Can they unilaterally stand up and say "any student who protests genocide is expelled."
I think that would be pretty fucked up. Hopefully you would, too. Which is why I think it's best that Universities should be protecting the rights of all their students and not get involved directly in politics. They need to stand up for their trans students, but they also need to be there for their student athletes who have no personal objections to trans students, but don't think its fair they get to compete in sports which are not for their birth gender. Which is a perfectly reasonable objection. Some of these women athletes work their entire lives to be seen by professional recruiters and if they're outshined by controversy from trans athletes and the debate of whether or not they should even be there in the first place they could be passed up for entire careers. All things considered, they're not crazy to give pause...and why Universities should have non-gendered leagues for sports where anyone can play regardless of gender. Why we reduce sports to male and female is so fucking stupid to begin with and such a stupid thing to fight over.
It's a complicated issue with no black or white line. And you pretending like there is either wholeheartedly proves your mental immaturity to not be able to see other's point of views at best, and at worse confirms your ignorance beyond any reasonable doubt.
That's literally not standing up for rights. Their rights don't extend to dictating who else can play sports because they think they'd be too good. Hey, you know another group that some people would claim, for some pretty suspect prejudices, they are too good at sports? Black people. There's certainly a much more disproportionate number of top black athletes than there are top trans athletes.
Fucking lol, wall-of-text-man who still couldn't explain precisely why he won't answer the parallel question and has been universally downvoted since he explained his position enough to make the transphobia evident. Hopefully someday you'll be embarrassed of your present self.
Yes it is. You can't "stand up for rights" by infringing on another's rights.
They’re not dictating who can play sports any more than they always have. There’s already a female league, which inherently means men can’t participate. Are you going to argue that having a women’s league is against the law or discriminatory in the first place? If that’s your stance, then you’re essentially agreeing with me that universities should transition from a gender-based system to an open, non-gendered system to be inclusive for all students--not just those who fit into clear, traditional gender roles. By doing that, literally no one would have any room to complain about transgender inclusion. It’s the obvious solution to everyone’s issues, but as a society, we’re so fixated on who has a penis and who has a vagina that we’re completely overlooking the simplicity and fairness of this approach. The best part is that it doesn't infringe on anyone's rights in the process...everyone is equal, everyone can participate and play, no one is excluded.
It’s almost as if people are free to have their own opinions about things, even when those opinions don’t align with the majority. Strange, right? Populism doesn’t bother me—it’s just the system functioning as it should. Frankly, I’m not impressed when someone holds the exact same opinion as a dozen or so random people on the internet. The fact that you think that’s how it should be is... odd to me. The way you feel things ought to be and the way they actually are will almost always differ. The reality is that even students who hold racist, sexist, xenophobic, or transphobic views also have rights, and you can’t trample on theirs without opening the door for everyone's rights to be trampled on.
You can’t protect rights by taking them away from others. That’s not protecting rights--it's just making yourself feel morally superior. It would be fantastic if trans individuals could compete without anyone having an issue with it. I’d fully support that. But that’s not the reality we live in, and denying that reality doesn't help anyone, least of all trans students. Sitting behind your keyboard and declaring, "Things should be this way!"--even when that approach grants rights to one group by stripping them from another--helps absolutely no one. Using the justification of "haha, he’s getting downvoted, so that means I’m right!" is just plain silly. Sure, it might be an unpopular opinion, but that doesn’t determine whether it's objectively true or not. Truth isn’t decided by popularity.
EDIT:
It's almost like this is a serious issue and deserves more than 140 characters. Why you think that's a bad thing is pretty fucked up. You're not the advocate you think that you are here.
You're right, there are like a dozen trans college athletes in the entire US. Good point.
Whatever you need to tell yourself to sleep at night, I guess. I feel I've done everything possible to disprove that, and at this point if you still hold that position than nothing can change your mind because you're reacting emotionally to the problem, and that's never--not once in the history of mankind--solved any of our problems.
"now look what you made me do!"