this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2024
8 points (63.3% liked)

politics

19097 readers
3250 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] WoahWoah@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

In the case of Dr. Hooven -- the person being referenced here -- her usage of binary biological sex categories was why she eventually needed/was bureaucratically forced to retire from Harvard. She never had issue with using people's preferred pronouns or names. She taught a well-regarded course, "Hormones and Behavior," and was attacked, in my opinion, for going on Fox News to defend the usage of "female" and "male" as categories of biological sex in medical classes.

While she's a life-long Democrat, I suspect if she hadn't gone on Fox & Friends to defend the position, the blowback would have been less targeted and vicious.

That being said, Harris's piece is exponentially more troubling and offensive than anything Hooven ever did. In my estimation, it's misguided, short-sighted, and poorly conceived. Worse, it's largely wrong.

[–] LovingHippieCat@lemmy.world -1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

going on Fox News to defend the usage of "female" and "male" as categories of biological sex in medical classes.

Yeah no one is saying to use different terms when it comes to biological sex. It's not happening. What they're likely doing is simply saying there's more complexity to what defines biological sex. Going on Fox News and saying that is showing who she is. A believer in the far rights talking points when it comes to trans issues. She went on Fox News to defend something like that when that thing just isn't happening is why she was likely pushed out. Because shes parroting far right talking points.

And as we've seen recently with a handful of Democrats throwing trans people under the bus, her being a lifelong Democrat means nothing here.

[–] WoahWoah@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Yes, people did precisely that in this case. Or do you speak for all trans people and trans allies? I didn't get the memo. You're literally doing the thing being criticized. I explained to you that they were pushed out for defending the terms female and male for biological sex in her field. Your response: "yeah, that's not what it was, it's because she's a crypto-conservative working for the IDF."

It's like, well. OK, but that's not what happened. Many people on the left have gone on fox news to defend positions. Do you just assume they too are all therefore secretly conservative? What a silly worldview to have.

Regardless, I'm not going to bicker with you, I don't want you hyperventilating again. I'll block you and make it easier for both of us. Good luck with your video games.