Chase Strangio is a throbbbing, talking bag of personality and psychiatric disorders in the approximate form of Charlie Chaplin. Never have I seen a more disingenuous liberal attorney barking away on Twitter, which is like finding the most steroid-powered rider in the history of the Tour de France.
Ever since Stangio's jaw-dropping Slate article from years ago asserting in Book of Revelation-like overtones that anatomy is irrelevant, I've been waiting for one damn person in a sea of what has to be millions to rise up and say, "Chase Strangio is a flagrant lunatic," so that everyone else can finally exhale and stop worrying they were the only one not in on a worldwide dark joke.
There is something badly wrong with anyone who blatantly lies to millions of people a day and knows they can knock out the "tattletales" with the immediate help of Twitter's equivalent of knuckle-rapping nuns.
It's too bad Twitter is not a physical place, so that it could be purchased, evacuated of anyone still possessing humanity, and razed. I refuse to admit that people there might be as bad as they seem, so I cling to the thesis that Twitter elicits the worst and suppresses the best simultaneously in almost everyone.
For us Michaganders, anyway, there's a kind of fascinating subtext to Tlaib's participation in all of this. She's spent her first two terms in Congress representing Michigan's 13th District, which covers a big chunk of Detroit and some inner-ring suburbs, and was one of the safest Democratic seats in the country (the district was the creation of Michigan Republicans, who were packing as many urban Democrats into one district as possible). But in 2020 Michigan voters amended their constitution to eliminate party involvement in redistricting, and Tlaib's old district got cut in two, with downtown Detroit in one district (still the 13th) and a chunk of the western inner-ring suburbs in another (the new 12th). Tlaib, who's always had relatively soft numbers among Detroiters, has chosen to run this year in the 12th rather than the 13th -- which means she's facing a much more mixed electorate (assuming she wins the primary, this will be her first time running in a general election that she could plausibly lose). Her new district is still pretty blue on economic issues but also has large populations of very religious voters, many of them with pretty conservative social views (a mix of Catholics, Coptic Christians, Muslims and Protestants). She's also got three primary challengers. Not to be entirely cynical, but it seems like LGBTQIA+ justice is one of the planks she's using to distinguish herself in the primary, even though it seems like kind of an odd play given her new district; I guess she might also be looking for national attention to build up an out-of-district donor base to help with the general.
I wish people would make a stronger distinction between trans people and trans activists. Trans people really are marginalized and deserve a great deal more respect and safety than they currently receive. Trans activists like Strangio, by contrast, are self-aggrandizing blowhards and cultural imperialists who believe that they alone should dictate how the rest of the world uses language. Trans people deserve better advocates.
“Current treatment protocols for people with gender dysphoria are likely to lead to suboptimal outcomes for some patients” = “trans people don’t have the right to exist”? BS.
I just looked at your linked tweets. It's so strange to me how these progressives that claim to be so ANTI-BULLYING are the biggest damn bullies. All they do is send their followers at people they don't like. Twitter is such a cesspool.
Also, I too miss when the ACLU was about free speech
While it is true that many organizations on the left are "pushing for reproductive rights for women", they are simultaneously pushing to deny women the right to free association. They universally support (as do all Democrats in Congress) the Equality Act, which would allow any man to enter any women's space, place, organization, event, or competition at will, and make it illegal under federal law to stop him (and vice versa of course).
I am a 66 year old lifelong Democrat who has worked, over the decades, as a volunteer on multiple Democrat campaigns, and yet I voted straight Republican in the recent California primary, precisely because of this neo-miscogyny of Democrats, which I simply cannot bring myself to support.
What is a "trans kid"? A little boy who likes to play with girl toys, wear pink? It is this liberal, nonsensical notion that continues to be repeated as though it is truth. It is a made-up bull sh!t moniker. I am a parent of a child who for 2 years was persistent that she was a "he", but when I swam upstream and fought against every medical professional (that sounds quite like the satanic panic ilk of two decades ago). She went through endogenous puberty unencumbered by experience medicine and grew out of her delusion. (It wasn't quite as simple as that.) The NYT barely scratched the surface of truth, and you reiterate the falsehood that a child can be born in the wrong body. Jesse, you are smarter than that. Want to talk to parents? desisters, detransitioners? DM me.
The NYT had story after story from parents. I was interviewed for hours, supplied Emily with countless documents, gave her contact after contact. But the article spotlighted WPATH without an investigation as to who is WPATH and its high ranking members. A quick review will show the fetish nature of that group. WPATH promotes Eunuchs and lower the age for young girls to slice off their breasts to 15. The ACLU pretends to care about women but cannot define them. The world is upside down, but this lawyer will not be silent. Yes, this lawyer will protect the truly marginalized - the children being told that there is something wrong with them that only a surgeon's knife will fix.
Rashida Tlaib is expressing the standard TRA view. If you don’t buy into every single TRA obsession, you are ‘transphobic’. Since the NYT dared to publish the opinions of folks who are not TRAs, the NYT is (by definition) ‘transphobic’. So are J.K. Rowling and a long list of other folks. According to the identity politics far-left, the world is full of dangerous ‘transphobes’ who must be suppressed.
"It’s regrettable that some abortion rights groups stopped using the word “women” (which I don’t think is necessary from an inclusivity perspective, anyway), but they’re still, at the end of day, pushing for reproductive rights for women, which is the opposite of what some conservatives are doing."
I know you specified 'abortion rights groups,' but an aside: I've been told my entire life that Democrats are pushing for reproductive rights for women. Recently I have started to seriously question whether they *are* pushing for this. Seriously, what have they done to protect abortion? Apart from saying they want to protect abortion, "please donate to my re-election campaign if you agree."
As much a piece of work as Rashida Tlaib is, Chase Strangio is more of a piece of work. He is very strange indeed. I don't think he is deranged, I think he is a performative clown. Things have really gone to hell at the ACLU, a skulk is in charge of the henhouse there.
Anthony Romero, Strangio, and their like-minded illiberal colleagues, should be turned out at the ACLU. Can we p-l-e-a-s-e have Ira Glasser back? I know, he's 84, but I can dream.
There are too many nemeses like Chasio afoot in the land at present, who want to totally shut down what they don't like. You can just picture them in their schoolyards back in the day with their fingers in the ears, saying "Nana nana nana, I can't hear you," when confronted when things they did not want to hear.
"I am an advocate, not a politician or journalist."
I think this statement tells you everything you need to know about the post-liberal left (PLL). The PLLs don't care about intellectual curiosity, or fairness, or empiricism; they're promoting the interests of the groups with whom they sympathize, and that's that. Whatever position they have to take, they'll take, and those liberals who refuse to accede will be treated as heretics. In this, PLLS are no different from the religious right.
Another similarity between PLLs and conservatives is the reaction to charges of hypocrisy. These rarely ruffle right-wingers, because they simply don't care about being seen as unfair or inconsistent. Fairness and consistency are not conservative values, and conservatives don't try to embody them.
Liberals, on the other hand, are driven to distraction by accusations of hypocrisy, and we'll spend an eternity either trying to explain why we are actually not being inconsistent, or else working to achieve a consistency that never satisfies our critics. That's probably why we call conservatives hypocrites; we expect them to react as we do. PLLs have moved rightward on this, because they, too, do not care if they are seen as hypocritical. Point out their hypocrisy and they'll probably tell you that consistency and fairness are the hallmarks of white supremacy. They simply do not value what liberals value, even if their goals are mostly the same.
That's my view, anyway. Feel free to criticize, to ensure I have not vanished into my own skull.
Chase Stangio is an extremist and a nutcase. She said that the book Irreversible Damage should not even be allowed in bookstores of libraries because it showed some of the downsides of transitioning such as long term effect of cross sex hormones. Imagine that ACLU that famously supported Nazis right to March in Skokie Ill, home at the time yto many Holocaust survivors now has one of their lawyers advocating banning books. So much for freedom of speech is you even dare to suggest that there may be some issues involving the trans activism that need to be discussed. I used to support the ACLU but as long as they insist that of trans trump everything else or the rights of biological women including refusing to use the word women, suing so men who identify as women whether or not they still have their penis,can share women’s prisons cells and play or swim on Womens sports teams, etc they will not get a penny from me.
Not many people, fall into the category of “genuinely evil people”. Chase Strangio is one of them. He is (in)famous for tweeting “stopping the circulation of this book and these ideas is 100% a hill I will die on”. What book was he tweeting about? That would be “Irreversible Damage” by Abigail Shrier. Of course, by one (very demented) standard, Strangio is actually one of the better people. Believe it or not, but a UC Berkeley professor (Grace Lavery) actually proposed to burn the book (safely of course).
I can see how this behavior from Strangio and Tlaib could be viewed as a threat to other outlets who might report on the subject. But is it that scary of a threat? "We're gonna get you a bunch of outrage clicks on your articles, and you can take the chance to respond with a new article, which will in turn get you a shit ton of clicks." In the current economy for journalism, this seems more like a favor than a threat.
Chase Strangio is a throbbbing, talking bag of personality and psychiatric disorders in the approximate form of Charlie Chaplin. Never have I seen a more disingenuous liberal attorney barking away on Twitter, which is like finding the most steroid-powered rider in the history of the Tour de France.
Ever since Stangio's jaw-dropping Slate article from years ago asserting in Book of Revelation-like overtones that anatomy is irrelevant, I've been waiting for one damn person in a sea of what has to be millions to rise up and say, "Chase Strangio is a flagrant lunatic," so that everyone else can finally exhale and stop worrying they were the only one not in on a worldwide dark joke.
There is something badly wrong with anyone who blatantly lies to millions of people a day and knows they can knock out the "tattletales" with the immediate help of Twitter's equivalent of knuckle-rapping nuns.
It's too bad Twitter is not a physical place, so that it could be purchased, evacuated of anyone still possessing humanity, and razed. I refuse to admit that people there might be as bad as they seem, so I cling to the thesis that Twitter elicits the worst and suppresses the best simultaneously in almost everyone.
For us Michaganders, anyway, there's a kind of fascinating subtext to Tlaib's participation in all of this. She's spent her first two terms in Congress representing Michigan's 13th District, which covers a big chunk of Detroit and some inner-ring suburbs, and was one of the safest Democratic seats in the country (the district was the creation of Michigan Republicans, who were packing as many urban Democrats into one district as possible). But in 2020 Michigan voters amended their constitution to eliminate party involvement in redistricting, and Tlaib's old district got cut in two, with downtown Detroit in one district (still the 13th) and a chunk of the western inner-ring suburbs in another (the new 12th). Tlaib, who's always had relatively soft numbers among Detroiters, has chosen to run this year in the 12th rather than the 13th -- which means she's facing a much more mixed electorate (assuming she wins the primary, this will be her first time running in a general election that she could plausibly lose). Her new district is still pretty blue on economic issues but also has large populations of very religious voters, many of them with pretty conservative social views (a mix of Catholics, Coptic Christians, Muslims and Protestants). She's also got three primary challengers. Not to be entirely cynical, but it seems like LGBTQIA+ justice is one of the planks she's using to distinguish herself in the primary, even though it seems like kind of an odd play given her new district; I guess she might also be looking for national attention to build up an out-of-district donor base to help with the general.
I wish people would make a stronger distinction between trans people and trans activists. Trans people really are marginalized and deserve a great deal more respect and safety than they currently receive. Trans activists like Strangio, by contrast, are self-aggrandizing blowhards and cultural imperialists who believe that they alone should dictate how the rest of the world uses language. Trans people deserve better advocates.
“Current treatment protocols for people with gender dysphoria are likely to lead to suboptimal outcomes for some patients” = “trans people don’t have the right to exist”? BS.
I just looked at your linked tweets. It's so strange to me how these progressives that claim to be so ANTI-BULLYING are the biggest damn bullies. All they do is send their followers at people they don't like. Twitter is such a cesspool.
Also, I too miss when the ACLU was about free speech
While it is true that many organizations on the left are "pushing for reproductive rights for women", they are simultaneously pushing to deny women the right to free association. They universally support (as do all Democrats in Congress) the Equality Act, which would allow any man to enter any women's space, place, organization, event, or competition at will, and make it illegal under federal law to stop him (and vice versa of course).
I am a 66 year old lifelong Democrat who has worked, over the decades, as a volunteer on multiple Democrat campaigns, and yet I voted straight Republican in the recent California primary, precisely because of this neo-miscogyny of Democrats, which I simply cannot bring myself to support.
I have my doubts that Abbott gives a single flying fuck about anything the NYT has to say.
What is a "trans kid"? A little boy who likes to play with girl toys, wear pink? It is this liberal, nonsensical notion that continues to be repeated as though it is truth. It is a made-up bull sh!t moniker. I am a parent of a child who for 2 years was persistent that she was a "he", but when I swam upstream and fought against every medical professional (that sounds quite like the satanic panic ilk of two decades ago). She went through endogenous puberty unencumbered by experience medicine and grew out of her delusion. (It wasn't quite as simple as that.) The NYT barely scratched the surface of truth, and you reiterate the falsehood that a child can be born in the wrong body. Jesse, you are smarter than that. Want to talk to parents? desisters, detransitioners? DM me.
The NYT had story after story from parents. I was interviewed for hours, supplied Emily with countless documents, gave her contact after contact. But the article spotlighted WPATH without an investigation as to who is WPATH and its high ranking members. A quick review will show the fetish nature of that group. WPATH promotes Eunuchs and lower the age for young girls to slice off their breasts to 15. The ACLU pretends to care about women but cannot define them. The world is upside down, but this lawyer will not be silent. Yes, this lawyer will protect the truly marginalized - the children being told that there is something wrong with them that only a surgeon's knife will fix.
Chase Strangio is dangerous and insane.
Rashida Tlaib is expressing the standard TRA view. If you don’t buy into every single TRA obsession, you are ‘transphobic’. Since the NYT dared to publish the opinions of folks who are not TRAs, the NYT is (by definition) ‘transphobic’. So are J.K. Rowling and a long list of other folks. According to the identity politics far-left, the world is full of dangerous ‘transphobes’ who must be suppressed.
"It’s regrettable that some abortion rights groups stopped using the word “women” (which I don’t think is necessary from an inclusivity perspective, anyway), but they’re still, at the end of day, pushing for reproductive rights for women, which is the opposite of what some conservatives are doing."
I know you specified 'abortion rights groups,' but an aside: I've been told my entire life that Democrats are pushing for reproductive rights for women. Recently I have started to seriously question whether they *are* pushing for this. Seriously, what have they done to protect abortion? Apart from saying they want to protect abortion, "please donate to my re-election campaign if you agree."
The backlash is of the transmaximalists making, and they should acknowledge that it's their fault instead of being sullen protestors.
As much a piece of work as Rashida Tlaib is, Chase Strangio is more of a piece of work. He is very strange indeed. I don't think he is deranged, I think he is a performative clown. Things have really gone to hell at the ACLU, a skulk is in charge of the henhouse there.
Anthony Romero, Strangio, and their like-minded illiberal colleagues, should be turned out at the ACLU. Can we p-l-e-a-s-e have Ira Glasser back? I know, he's 84, but I can dream.
There are too many nemeses like Chasio afoot in the land at present, who want to totally shut down what they don't like. You can just picture them in their schoolyards back in the day with their fingers in the ears, saying "Nana nana nana, I can't hear you," when confronted when things they did not want to hear.
God, we live in a juvenile country.
"I am an advocate, not a politician or journalist."
I think this statement tells you everything you need to know about the post-liberal left (PLL). The PLLs don't care about intellectual curiosity, or fairness, or empiricism; they're promoting the interests of the groups with whom they sympathize, and that's that. Whatever position they have to take, they'll take, and those liberals who refuse to accede will be treated as heretics. In this, PLLS are no different from the religious right.
Another similarity between PLLs and conservatives is the reaction to charges of hypocrisy. These rarely ruffle right-wingers, because they simply don't care about being seen as unfair or inconsistent. Fairness and consistency are not conservative values, and conservatives don't try to embody them.
Liberals, on the other hand, are driven to distraction by accusations of hypocrisy, and we'll spend an eternity either trying to explain why we are actually not being inconsistent, or else working to achieve a consistency that never satisfies our critics. That's probably why we call conservatives hypocrites; we expect them to react as we do. PLLs have moved rightward on this, because they, too, do not care if they are seen as hypocritical. Point out their hypocrisy and they'll probably tell you that consistency and fairness are the hallmarks of white supremacy. They simply do not value what liberals value, even if their goals are mostly the same.
That's my view, anyway. Feel free to criticize, to ensure I have not vanished into my own skull.
Chase Stangio is an extremist and a nutcase. She said that the book Irreversible Damage should not even be allowed in bookstores of libraries because it showed some of the downsides of transitioning such as long term effect of cross sex hormones. Imagine that ACLU that famously supported Nazis right to March in Skokie Ill, home at the time yto many Holocaust survivors now has one of their lawyers advocating banning books. So much for freedom of speech is you even dare to suggest that there may be some issues involving the trans activism that need to be discussed. I used to support the ACLU but as long as they insist that of trans trump everything else or the rights of biological women including refusing to use the word women, suing so men who identify as women whether or not they still have their penis,can share women’s prisons cells and play or swim on Womens sports teams, etc they will not get a penny from me.
Not many people, fall into the category of “genuinely evil people”. Chase Strangio is one of them. He is (in)famous for tweeting “stopping the circulation of this book and these ideas is 100% a hill I will die on”. What book was he tweeting about? That would be “Irreversible Damage” by Abigail Shrier. Of course, by one (very demented) standard, Strangio is actually one of the better people. Believe it or not, but a UC Berkeley professor (Grace Lavery) actually proposed to burn the book (safely of course).
I can see how this behavior from Strangio and Tlaib could be viewed as a threat to other outlets who might report on the subject. But is it that scary of a threat? "We're gonna get you a bunch of outrage clicks on your articles, and you can take the chance to respond with a new article, which will in turn get you a shit ton of clicks." In the current economy for journalism, this seems more like a favor than a threat.