I think they’re showing their true self. Would have another Fetterman.

This is just more confirmation that the right candidate won. Losing the primary and then supporting the republican is some scummy shit.

I’m willing to bet if the voters approve it, it won’t ever be implemented.

why did he cancel a LGBTQ healrh budget?

I don’t know, but why did he sign one of the “most significant public investments in LGBTQ+ health, wellbeing, and safety in state history” a month later? Funny you missed this.

https://lalgbtcenter.org/vanguard/press-releases/the-center-applauds-historic-california-budget-creating-the-first-statewide-lgbtq-community-center-fund/

I gotta say, fact that you didn’t respond to this and then muted me tells me all I need to know about you. When faced with the fact that you were WRONG, about basically everything in this conversation, your response to ignore and call names and mute.

I know you won’t see this, but it should be out there anyway.

🙈🙉

You definitely are adhering to your opinion and prejudice, with regard to your dislike of members of a particular group

Quit making shit up. In no way have I said or expressed a dislike of the Trans community. You added this because you know what I have said so far does not match this definition.

Edit: cause I missed this.

Nope. You openly expressed aversion to transgender folk, and also excused formal imstitutional prejudice as somehow not being transphpbia just because it was presumably not made out of animus. Except that precluding all trans femms from femm sports is a hat trick of discrimination against, aversion to, *and* fear of.

More making shit up. I have shown ZERO aversion to trans people. You are making shit up for your own argument. And you tacked on the word fear for literally no reason.

Prejudice is a weird one. Any restriction on women sports can be considered prejudice, whether trans women are allowed or not. Unless your argument is women sports should be open to everybody, you are showing prejudice as well.

This is your problem. You do not understand the other side and are completely unwilling to, so you make shit up to justify ignoring others.

For fun I decided to kick the links and see what the fuss was about. I’m ignoring the billionaire one cause that obviously has nothing to do with this conversation.

why did he cancel a LGBTQ healrh budget?

I don’t know, but why did he sign one of the “most significant public investments in LGBTQ+ health, wellbeing, and safety in state history” a month later? Funny you missed this.

https://lalgbtcenter.org/vanguard/press-releases/the-center-applauds-historic-california-budget-creating-the-first-statewide-lgbtq-community-center-fund/

Why did he veto a law that would have protected doctors from being dragged to Texas for daring to provide gender affirming care to ex-texans?

Maybe you didn’t open and read this article, cause the article literally answers your question. I’ll paste it here for you:

In his veto notice, Newsom said he worries that if he allows the legislature to take that discretionary authority away from the governor on his way out the door, others will do the same in the future in a bid to limit the next governor’s power.

As he did a rule to ensure trans folk on HRT can stock up?

He’s a transphobe because he doesn’t let ya’ll stock up? OK. All my meds are 90 days max. Your meds are 90 day. Just cause he doesn’t give you special treatment, he’s a transphobe.

First of all, you could have given the actual definition of transphobia and bigot (there are dictionaries), but you chose a version that matches your arguments.

Your made up definitions allow you to call anybody that disagrees with you a transphobic bigot. And you can keep your same opinion without having to take into account other opinions.

As for Rob Sand and Newsom. I don’t like Newsom. But he’s probably the one I think about the most. His interview with Kirk, for instance, did not come across as unreasonable, and he was even supportive of trans people in a way that was fully ignored by everybody on here. Kirk was not, of course. The reaction from the Trans community was swift and unreasonable.

I’ve looked into other bills he gets bashed for, often times there’s nuance that is ignored and a catchy headline that gets the reaction it wants. I don’t really like defending him cause he kind of sucks.

I asked you to prove one example that supports this assertion of over-reaction and you refused

I told you I already left a comment and you said you would find it. Which you clearly did because you moved to that thread, but I’ll copy one below… All the Newsom ones apply too. Scroll up if you need help finding them.

https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2026/09/coward-democrat-confronted-by-angry-constituents-for-opposing-trans-equality/

I would argue his comments were not transphobic (mildly or not), but he was shouted at during his speech as well as the comments I read on Lemmy.

You and I will disagree on whether it was transphobic or not, but we’ll have to agree to disagree. If you want another example, just reread our conversation 😂

I didn’t call you a bigot because I think you are incapable of growing and becoming better.

Maybe reread the comment you’re replying to. I didn’t say anything about “incapable of growing…”

You are calling me a bigot because you don’t want to listen to other people’s opinions. Calling me a bigot makes it easier for you to ignore me. If I’m a bigot then you don’t have to worry about the possibility that you are the one that’s wrong.

Calling me a bigot makes you feel better about your own opinion while doing nothing to earn it.

Why is the ignorance of those echoing bigotry more important to you than the outrage of those targeted by it?

I think it’s clear that you are going to throw out the term “Bigot” at the drop of a hat. In doing so you make the word meaningless.

I’m not going to listen to people that I consider bigots. Not every conservative is. If conservatives are making valid points and I ignore them because other conservatives are bigots, that leads to a situation where I am the unreasonable one.

Here’s what it looks like to me. You and I have a difference of opinions. But you don’t have a real solid argument for why you are right and I am wrong.

So instead of having a conversation and making arguments, you demonize me. If I’m a bigot, then you don’t need to have a conversation. You don’t need to take my comments seriously. You also don’t need to defend your position or argue against mine.

Fact is, I am an incredibly open and empathetic person. I consider myself progressive, pro lgbtq. But I also recognize that a problem leftists have had is not listening to the actual things the opposition says. Not everything a conservative says is wrong. For you, it’s easy to say “you’re a bigot” and feel good about yourself. For me, I want to understand where their comments are coming from. Many times it is coming from a place of bigotry, but many times it is well intentioned.

You want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, your going to find your movement is very lonely. You want to accept that not everybody on the left shares 100% of your opinions. You want to engage in dialogue rather than calling people names. I think things will be much better for everybody.

Oh, I think you are a transphobic bigot! Sexist, too.

Ftfy. I see your opinion was stated as fact. You can say I am ignorant about something, which would make for a valuable conversation, but saying “you’re a bigot cause you don’t know the things I know” is a non starter.

Even worse since most people do not see things the same as you.

This is 99% wrong. The gendered distinctions in sports exist largely because in sports with the most gendered bias the top tier of girls still outperforms the sub-median cohort of boys,.and those boys historically do not take it well.

Are you saying we separate male/female sports because a boy doesn’t want to lose to a girl? It’s a pride thing?

Much like the comment on sexual assault, if you have actual articles that support this, I’d love to hear it.

It’s not can’t play on the team I want, it’s can’t play at all and am publicly identified as other.

I don’t even know where this is coming from. Even the people referring to trans women as boys (who are bigots), are not saying trans people can’t play at all. You’re making this up.

And publicly identified as “other”? I’ve never head this. But it sounds made up as well. Certainly not something supported by people on the left.

Phew. Too many things to respond to, but I read all of it, and I definitely see your perspective on many things and understand the unique challenges trans people face.

Specifically in the conversation of sports, I see the other side of it. The male/female distinction in sports doesn’t exist so you can play with your peers. It’s due biological differences between people born male and female. I understand that you will add massive amount of context that is very specific to trans people, but to most people, it is a very simple thing that does not need to be complicated by medication or body composition, or anything else.

Your comment about not distinguishing between competitive and non competitive sports is literally my point. It should be distinguished. Trans community should be saying “we just want to play with our peers, we don’t care at what level”. This would make the conversation much different nationally.

No, I make it sound like forcing trans girls into locker rooms with male athletes puts them at higher risk of being sexually or otherwise assaulted than they otherwise would be.

Is this actually based on anything, or is it just an idea that you think makes sense that isnt actually representative of where sexual assaults come from? I genuinely wonder as it just doesn’t make sense that sexual assaults would come as a result of sharing a locker room. I would guess that allowing trans women to play women sports would have a 0% impact on the stat.

There are many sports where females are on male teams already, and each one of those needs to take into account the locker room situation. For trans women, this should be considered as well. And if it’s not, that is a problem with the administration, not with the sport structure.

I’ll take this deflection as an admission that your nazi point was stupid.

Look, I shard articles yesterday from a different comment where people have been very supportive of trans people, but disagree on the issue of sports, and they have been labeled transphobic for it. It’s no worth copying and pasting cause you and I probably disagree on what constitutes a transphobic bigot, so what’s the point?

I know. It’s still a very stupid comparison. “I can’t play on the team that I want to play on, I’m just like the Jewish people in the holocaust!” That’s how this reads.

I don’t disagree that there are a lot of transphobic bigots in this world, and they genuinely want trans people to be miserable. But my entire point is, you will label somebody a transphobic bigot when they are actually incredibly supportive of trans people in most ways, but just have a difference of opinion on very few issues.

Adding nuance is great, as it helps identify the actual issues and discussion actual solutions.

But do you see how saying “Trans people are being banned from sports” is an intentionally manipulative way representing the issue? I see stuff like this all the time on here, and it gets tiring.

I’ll be honest, I see manipulative language in your comment as well.

Banned from participating in sports with their peers

Male/female sports isn’t about “playing with your peers”. Also, there’s a further nuance that NOBODY discusses, and that’s the difference between competitive levels. Schools have varsity vs jv. There’s travel leagues vs Rec leagues. Trans people should have the opportunity to play with their peers, but that doesn’t mean it has to include every level of competition.

Essentially forcing them to deny their identity to participate

"Essentially” is doing some very heavy lifting in this sentence because nothing else about that sentence is true.

trans women statistically are more at risk for sexual assault than any other demographic

Is this bad? Yeah! Should something be done about this? Of course!

But you bring it up to make it sound like this is a result of trans women not being allowed to play women sports. This is incredibly manipulative.

I could go on with other comments I have seen on here.

That’s a much more specific statement than you’re other one, and you know it. You intentionally misrepresent what is being proposed to make it sound worse.

They’re not being banned from sports. They’re being told which team they’re allowed to join. It’s significantly different.

Nobody is banning trans people from sports. That’s not even a discussion.

I guess because some democrats think trans women shouldn’t play women sports, they’re basically the same as Hitler. lol.

I don’t think this applies. I think there’s plenty of support that is forgotten about when somebody disagrees with your opinion. Cunts like you, fuck you… keep being the problem.