I really like you, Matt, but it’s not about being offended for the sake of it - it’s about recognizing that some opinions can perpetuate harm.
Most of your “examples” of ‘ If you believe this, then you must be that’ are way over simplified in your message. Humans are complex and so are these issues. Parents know their kids best and most often, kids know themselves even more. Decisions and discussions are made to attend an event to see drag shows, which, by the way, do not have the queens scantily clad, as you said. I encourage you to do some research or attend one yourself.
I’d like to see your stats on surgeries and infertility for kids who are trans, since you mentioned it as point for transphobia. A very large portion of gender affirming care surgeries, in Canada, are NOT performed on anyone under the age of 18. Puberty blockers have less risks than viagra. Don’t men with erectile disfunction have our concern just as much? And really, neither are anyone’s business. These decisions should be based on discussions with the appropriate people and health professionals. Not government.
There are other issues that need to be highlighted. What about human trafficking? Forced sexual and labour trade, for example. This involves up to 25% of our population. That % is mostly under the age of 18. Literal Children. But fu*k them, right? Trans people are less than .4% of the population in the entirety of Canada, yet their simple desire to exist is being used as the conservative platform.
Listen, I’m not fan of Trudeau and I’ve honestly reached a point where I’m tired of both parties. It’s so frustrating to listen to both Liberal and Conservative agendas. They’re fighting for control rather than actually addressing the real issues that matter and neither are offering solutions. Right now, neither side truly represents what’s best for ALL Canadians but in my “opinion” conservatives are focused on outdated issues and ones that have zero common sense or basic human decency, all while dividing Canadians. It’s getting old.
I don’t think I’m trying to be terribly specific here, rather I am trying to describe a phenomenon - a feeling. This was in no way meant to be an academic paper.
I am not saying that I hold any or all of the positions that I use as examples to illustrate the writing off and ad hominem attacks against those who question the progressive narrative. I’m using them to simply illustrate the extremes.
Of course, there are loads of important issues, but that’s not what I was writing about. I’m writing about the phenomenon of the mushy middle becoming more open to conservatism due to the prevalence of extreme rhetoric often used by progressive activists.
The examples that I use are merely illustrations. I do critique two specific policies - the child care program and Bill C 18, but the remainder of the issues are used for illustrative purposes only.
The title of your post is “Why the world is turning right”. You encourage discussion and communication yet your response is your original post wasn’t for academic purposes? You use those examples to support your opinion. It’s dismissive when you call important human issues a phenomenon.
This is a pretty confusing reply to Matt's reply. His opinion piece is clearly trying to explain why the general population "feels" a certain way and trends towards certain ideas over time. I think the approach has to be a bit loose and philosophical to have any value really. The average person is (unfortunately) statistically illiterate and does relatively very little research on the vast majority topics anyway. But this doesn't matter that much anymore as we've seen (over many credible published articles and meta-analysis in journals) how the research systems/frameworks around science, and specifically medicine, have been exposed in recent years as not being nearly as authoritative or concession-forming as we all used to "feel/think" they were. There's quite a bit of ideology and politics to be found in these systems. Foucault was on to something.
But it's not just about the convoluted and contradictory information that is out there. We can throw stats at each other all day and that's fine. What I got from Matt's post is much more about the dignity of having discussions and arguments without being shouted down and labelled as a "bad" person almost immediately.
About two of the points you mentioned: - "Puberty blockers have less risks than viagra". The risk profiles of these two things are so utterly different that I can't see how it would even be helpful in comparing them but I think you should be called out on the this statement because 1. Puberty blockers have been studied for very little time and we don't have any idea of the long term consequences 2. The decision of weighing risks by a 45+ year old adult versus their quality of life is clearly very different than someone under 18.
- Drag queens historically come from extremely sexualized beginnings, this is a fact. It's not unreasonable for parents to be concerned about something popularly known for this kind of sexualization being exposed to their children, even if it's not what drag story time is about. The misunderstanding should absolutely be expected and not weaponized as "oh you're so ignorant". I find that stance pretty obtuse and disingenuous (I'm not saying you have this stance, but I've seen it taken advantage of on multiple occasions by advocates).
Well said, Matt. And very well written. Clear, factual and logical.
I really like you, Matt, but it’s not about being offended for the sake of it - it’s about recognizing that some opinions can perpetuate harm.
Most of your “examples” of ‘ If you believe this, then you must be that’ are way over simplified in your message. Humans are complex and so are these issues. Parents know their kids best and most often, kids know themselves even more. Decisions and discussions are made to attend an event to see drag shows, which, by the way, do not have the queens scantily clad, as you said. I encourage you to do some research or attend one yourself.
I’d like to see your stats on surgeries and infertility for kids who are trans, since you mentioned it as point for transphobia. A very large portion of gender affirming care surgeries, in Canada, are NOT performed on anyone under the age of 18. Puberty blockers have less risks than viagra. Don’t men with erectile disfunction have our concern just as much? And really, neither are anyone’s business. These decisions should be based on discussions with the appropriate people and health professionals. Not government.
There are other issues that need to be highlighted. What about human trafficking? Forced sexual and labour trade, for example. This involves up to 25% of our population. That % is mostly under the age of 18. Literal Children. But fu*k them, right? Trans people are less than .4% of the population in the entirety of Canada, yet their simple desire to exist is being used as the conservative platform.
Listen, I’m not fan of Trudeau and I’ve honestly reached a point where I’m tired of both parties. It’s so frustrating to listen to both Liberal and Conservative agendas. They’re fighting for control rather than actually addressing the real issues that matter and neither are offering solutions. Right now, neither side truly represents what’s best for ALL Canadians but in my “opinion” conservatives are focused on outdated issues and ones that have zero common sense or basic human decency, all while dividing Canadians. It’s getting old.
Oh! And I like you too ❤️
I don’t think I’m trying to be terribly specific here, rather I am trying to describe a phenomenon - a feeling. This was in no way meant to be an academic paper.
I am not saying that I hold any or all of the positions that I use as examples to illustrate the writing off and ad hominem attacks against those who question the progressive narrative. I’m using them to simply illustrate the extremes.
Of course, there are loads of important issues, but that’s not what I was writing about. I’m writing about the phenomenon of the mushy middle becoming more open to conservatism due to the prevalence of extreme rhetoric often used by progressive activists.
The examples that I use are merely illustrations. I do critique two specific policies - the child care program and Bill C 18, but the remainder of the issues are used for illustrative purposes only.
The title of your post is “Why the world is turning right”. You encourage discussion and communication yet your response is your original post wasn’t for academic purposes? You use those examples to support your opinion. It’s dismissive when you call important human issues a phenomenon.
This is a pretty confusing reply to Matt's reply. His opinion piece is clearly trying to explain why the general population "feels" a certain way and trends towards certain ideas over time. I think the approach has to be a bit loose and philosophical to have any value really. The average person is (unfortunately) statistically illiterate and does relatively very little research on the vast majority topics anyway. But this doesn't matter that much anymore as we've seen (over many credible published articles and meta-analysis in journals) how the research systems/frameworks around science, and specifically medicine, have been exposed in recent years as not being nearly as authoritative or concession-forming as we all used to "feel/think" they were. There's quite a bit of ideology and politics to be found in these systems. Foucault was on to something.
Case in point, the recent reversals in European medical positions around beta blockers for youth and the suspicious actions by certain scientists: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/23/science/puberty-blockers-olson-kennedy.html.
But it's not just about the convoluted and contradictory information that is out there. We can throw stats at each other all day and that's fine. What I got from Matt's post is much more about the dignity of having discussions and arguments without being shouted down and labelled as a "bad" person almost immediately.
About two of the points you mentioned: - "Puberty blockers have less risks than viagra". The risk profiles of these two things are so utterly different that I can't see how it would even be helpful in comparing them but I think you should be called out on the this statement because 1. Puberty blockers have been studied for very little time and we don't have any idea of the long term consequences 2. The decision of weighing risks by a 45+ year old adult versus their quality of life is clearly very different than someone under 18.
- Drag queens historically come from extremely sexualized beginnings, this is a fact. It's not unreasonable for parents to be concerned about something popularly known for this kind of sexualization being exposed to their children, even if it's not what drag story time is about. The misunderstanding should absolutely be expected and not weaponized as "oh you're so ignorant". I find that stance pretty obtuse and disingenuous (I'm not saying you have this stance, but I've seen it taken advantage of on multiple occasions by advocates).