This isn't the issue. What people choose to do in their personal lives should be accepted or at least tolerated, as long as it's not harming anyone.
> what bathroom they use
This is the problematic part. A male using the women's bathroom is committing a violation against women.
> etc.
This includes males in women's prisons, males in women's changing/locker rooms, males in women's sports. All of which are violations against women.
It isn't about "hating LGBT people" as you suggest, but about compelling males to respect women's and girls' boundaries.
For far too long, a subset of males have been getting away with not doing so, just because these males express a desire to be female. It's quite absurd that it's taken Trump of all people to attempt to rectify this. The political left should have reeled in their activists, who were promoting all this, a long time ago.
> This is the problematic part. A male using the women's bathroom is committing a violation against women
It's mostly men saying this [1]. (Specifically, uneducated men over the age of 50. Especially if they're conservative, Republican or attend weekly religious service.)
Traditional gender roles and stereotypes are part of the reason why some males end up desiring to be women, because they've confused female with feminine. There's nothing wrong with men wearing dresses or indeed any feminine clothing. But thinking this somehow transitions them into being women is ludicrous and sexist.
Ideally we'd be rid of these stereotypes. They're part of the problem.
> Yours, worried and authoritarian, focused on an imaginary moral panic propagated by reactionary Internet forums.
The authoritarian side is the one insisting that males who call themselves women actually are women, and punishing those who disagree. In some states it is actually illegal to have a female-only space. It has to be female plus any male who says he's a woman.
That's not liberty is it, certainly not for women who want or need spaces without any males present.
There are so many cases where this type of policy has demonstrably harmed women. At the most extreme end is males being incarcerated in women's prisons on this basis, who have then raped, sexually assaulted and even impregnated the women locked up with them.
This is the consequence of these "luxury beliefs" capturing institutions of the state.
It _could_ be that, too, but as it turns out, in this particular case, it was the scary scary transes (see their response elsewhere in the thread).
With people who go on about 'luxury beliefs', the belief that they're referring to is nearly always 'trans people are people', I assume because it's such a new coinage (it's only a few years old) and that was what the far-right were mostly scared of at the time.
You are the only one who brought up gender minorities, as well as the TERF I disagreed with.
Anyone wingbrained enough can have luxury beliefs, and I’m not immune.
For example, I previously supported a very liberal drug policy, and still do in many respects… though I realize it failed spectacularly in the fentanyl era and have had to live with the consequences of that.
Better than the alternative? Well, we aren’t ruining as many lives over cannabis…
> They've effectively destroyed the most progressive party from the inside, by having it push ludicrous and unpopular policy
I generally agree with this (as a mostly democratic leaning citizen)
> that privileges males and actively harms women and girls.
But was surprised to see it followed by this. Can you explain your logic here? Not disagreeing. But at a glance it seems to me that it's the rolling back of DEI policies that is privileging males and harming women and girls.
Maoist rhetoric and hyperpoliticization in academia, seeping out to the broader society.
Or in internet cultural terms tumblr/redditization of environments that should be intellectually neutral, because “it’s called being a good person sweatie”
What on earth does that even mean