NYT, WaPo, CNN, MSNBC all just keep marching right. And on this issue in particular, the NYT has been the leading edge of pseudo-left / pseudo-middle anti-trans b.s. -- sorry (as always) about this Parker, wish we could see the exact opposite--lifting the marginalized and those left out (or targeted), rather than trivializing, ignoring, or worse here--quantifying the bigotry in a gloss of legitimacy (math? a chart?!) to further delegitimize and further marginalize. Nazi pseudoscience anyone?
It has been a long time coming, but this chart feels like the final straw, nail in the coffin, etc. etc. etc. for the NYT. I should not be shocked . . . but it still feels shocking. Goodbye NYT, your moral compass is broken.
Washington Post called in "body-language experts" to analyze the Trump-Zelensky meeting. Earlier, the NY Times had their Style editor write about Pete Hegseth's suit. Meeting the moment in the most trivial way possible.
I know they are mostly propagandists but it’s alarming and revolting how little concern they have for the denial of very fundamental equal rights of citizenship and civic participation. That’s how you KNOW you are moving into the authoritarian realm—when people are deprived of these. Authoritarianism is something all these people all claim they are opposed to. Don’t they pretend they believe in individual liberty and equal protection under the law? How then can they think it is not serious when a government targets and scapegoats a minority, and deprives them of equal protection and the right to civic participation, the benefits of military service, passports, employment protection?
All sane people who have been paying attention to this process of deranged propaganda eroding the environment for equal protection and freedom of transgender people would finish that sentence ‘on the basis of conspiracy theories and cooked up lies’
Some people let them off the hook with—oh, but they *believe* the conspiracy theories and cooked up lies. And yes, that’s the main reason some are sanguine. Their own bigotry has blocked any capacity to reason clearly. But this is never *an excuse*.
But the others who supposedly don’t believe the conspiracy theories —they think it’s about NUMBERS? Numbers don’t matter when a small group is being scapegoated and deprived of rights and freedoms and equal respect! What an absurd idea. Rights are not about quantity of people that have them but are about protection *for the individual*. You don’t ‘get more rights’ after a certain threshold where there is more of you. An individual *has* certain rights. A transgender soldier or employee or student cannot be justly denied the status and protection that other people have that allows them the benefits of citizenship even if there are just a few transgender soldiers, employees, students, etc.
Or else rights themselves make no sense. But only a fascist thinks that, and these people claim they are not fascists.
Maybe it seems like there’s no point in trying to explain this to people who are so indifferent to dehumanizing rhetoric, and political scapegoating, and all the same things that we have *known for generations* are incredibly terrifying, destructive and wrong.
Right now, we’re past the point of convincing people because shit is happening—and this very newspaper is partly responsible for these things. Unfortunately, shit is happening so we have to go past the point where we ask— ‘how can they ignore the danger of scapegoating of groups after what we know happens when you scapegoat groups’? It’s outrageous but history has shown that people will do this. They will be sanguine and indifferent when the government denies basic human worth to other people.
There is no question they are all possibly responsible and I don’t think it’s just because they fell into the trap of believing flimsy lies. Their purposes were served by scapegoating. Why did they not just call out dehumanizing scapegoating when it started, which is something that would be rational on the basis of history? And then why did they constantly amplify dehumanizing scapegoating, normalize it, spread it, and make it respectable to do?
I have theories but they are not of consequence.
They weren’t just reporting. They DID stuff—the NYT even commissioned a study about transgender children that didn’t exist previously to shore up their dipshittery. They aren’t just weighing in on the wrong side of the conspiracy theory and propaganda war—they actively participated in it, and added to it.
Whenever possible there should be no equivocation that each of these supposedly non-fascist pundits consider the targeting of a minority group to strip them of the fundamental rights they need to travel, work, participate, and live on the grounds of civic equality to be either a good thing or a ‘minor’ thing, something that should should shock the conscience of decent people. That is collaborating with authoritarianism at the very least.
But there’s something worse than that—they GET something out of it, in my view. They benefit from it. The didn’t just ignore it or not stop it—they positioned themselves directly to actively do it.
The NYT is directly responsible for the dehumanizing scapegoating of transgender people, and also responsible for whatever catastrophes result in the illiberal and potentially violent future we may find ourselves in, one that is already a threat to many.
They are responsible for people being dehumanized, scapegoated, and losing their rights, and anything else that results from this.
That NYT article is a load of crap for so many reasons. Consider - their 3 nominally conservative staff writers in French/Douthat/Brooks were not Trumpy enough, so they had to bring in 2 extra ringers; if we accept that the other 4 are all left (Dubious since Kristoff is def a centrist for example) that's still them working to weight things more heavily on the 'conservative' side.
Aka "We didnt have any MAGA cultists so we brought two in."
And the MAGA idiots were the ones rating our issues as /more/ important, so if the RA RA GO NAZIS writers are removed we are even less important!
And theeeen I look at the photos and what do I see? All but one face is white. Tressie Mcmillan Cottom, the lone black woman, consistently has the actual good opinions.
So glad I ain't giving that rag shit for money; that instead goes to you & other actual journalists doing real work.
What is the reason given for barring any trans girl or woman from competing in women's supports. Apparently they "are" taller and stronger. Suddenly SKILL is no longer a criteria that sports needs to care about. Also, in late grade school, lots of girls are actually taller and stronger than boys. Should they be REQUIRED to play only on boys' teams?
I can see that it might be unfair to have SOME trans women barred from women's teams. Sometimes taller and stronger is indeed unfair. But as a blanket rule? In all instances? Should we bar tall, strong cis women from women's sports?
This all has little to do with sports. It has everything to do with scapegoating, with stereotyping, with finding a minority it is "moral" to hate. Funny thing--that is the way the Nazis portrayed the Jews: it was a moral PLUS to hate them.
It will be such a positive impact for this rag of legacy media to finally go under, and I imagine hardly any worthwhile lives will be materially affected for it. Let collaborating propagandists have the fates they deserve.
What the Criminal does to Trans people is the first step towards doing it to all of us.
First they came for the trade unionists, but only about 9% of workers are represented by unions, so meh.
This and it's incredible how few people see that.
So, am I getting this right? "{ending} DEI" is the one thing deemed positive?
By columnists who write for the New York Times. On average. Pamela Paul's enthusiastic "+10, big thumbs up!" skewed the average.
NYT, WaPo, CNN, MSNBC all just keep marching right. And on this issue in particular, the NYT has been the leading edge of pseudo-left / pseudo-middle anti-trans b.s. -- sorry (as always) about this Parker, wish we could see the exact opposite--lifting the marginalized and those left out (or targeted), rather than trivializing, ignoring, or worse here--quantifying the bigotry in a gloss of legitimacy (math? a chart?!) to further delegitimize and further marginalize. Nazi pseudoscience anyone?
It has been a long time coming, but this chart feels like the final straw, nail in the coffin, etc. etc. etc. for the NYT. I should not be shocked . . . but it still feels shocking. Goodbye NYT, your moral compass is broken.
Thank you for your reporting Parker!
Washington Post called in "body-language experts" to analyze the Trump-Zelensky meeting. Earlier, the NY Times had their Style editor write about Pete Hegseth's suit. Meeting the moment in the most trivial way possible.
actually I found those insights about body language interesting. Certainly the signal from Rubio showed craven in the extreme.
Rubio once made a joke about Trump having a small dick, and Trump will make him pay for that 10 times a day til he finally resigns, a broken man.
I know they are mostly propagandists but it’s alarming and revolting how little concern they have for the denial of very fundamental equal rights of citizenship and civic participation. That’s how you KNOW you are moving into the authoritarian realm—when people are deprived of these. Authoritarianism is something all these people all claim they are opposed to. Don’t they pretend they believe in individual liberty and equal protection under the law? How then can they think it is not serious when a government targets and scapegoats a minority, and deprives them of equal protection and the right to civic participation, the benefits of military service, passports, employment protection?
All sane people who have been paying attention to this process of deranged propaganda eroding the environment for equal protection and freedom of transgender people would finish that sentence ‘on the basis of conspiracy theories and cooked up lies’
Some people let them off the hook with—oh, but they *believe* the conspiracy theories and cooked up lies. And yes, that’s the main reason some are sanguine. Their own bigotry has blocked any capacity to reason clearly. But this is never *an excuse*.
But the others who supposedly don’t believe the conspiracy theories —they think it’s about NUMBERS? Numbers don’t matter when a small group is being scapegoated and deprived of rights and freedoms and equal respect! What an absurd idea. Rights are not about quantity of people that have them but are about protection *for the individual*. You don’t ‘get more rights’ after a certain threshold where there is more of you. An individual *has* certain rights. A transgender soldier or employee or student cannot be justly denied the status and protection that other people have that allows them the benefits of citizenship even if there are just a few transgender soldiers, employees, students, etc.
Or else rights themselves make no sense. But only a fascist thinks that, and these people claim they are not fascists.
Maybe it seems like there’s no point in trying to explain this to people who are so indifferent to dehumanizing rhetoric, and political scapegoating, and all the same things that we have *known for generations* are incredibly terrifying, destructive and wrong.
Right now, we’re past the point of convincing people because shit is happening—and this very newspaper is partly responsible for these things. Unfortunately, shit is happening so we have to go past the point where we ask— ‘how can they ignore the danger of scapegoating of groups after what we know happens when you scapegoat groups’? It’s outrageous but history has shown that people will do this. They will be sanguine and indifferent when the government denies basic human worth to other people.
There is no question they are all possibly responsible and I don’t think it’s just because they fell into the trap of believing flimsy lies. Their purposes were served by scapegoating. Why did they not just call out dehumanizing scapegoating when it started, which is something that would be rational on the basis of history? And then why did they constantly amplify dehumanizing scapegoating, normalize it, spread it, and make it respectable to do?
I have theories but they are not of consequence.
They weren’t just reporting. They DID stuff—the NYT even commissioned a study about transgender children that didn’t exist previously to shore up their dipshittery. They aren’t just weighing in on the wrong side of the conspiracy theory and propaganda war—they actively participated in it, and added to it.
Whenever possible there should be no equivocation that each of these supposedly non-fascist pundits consider the targeting of a minority group to strip them of the fundamental rights they need to travel, work, participate, and live on the grounds of civic equality to be either a good thing or a ‘minor’ thing, something that should should shock the conscience of decent people. That is collaborating with authoritarianism at the very least.
But there’s something worse than that—they GET something out of it, in my view. They benefit from it. The didn’t just ignore it or not stop it—they positioned themselves directly to actively do it.
The NYT is directly responsible for the dehumanizing scapegoating of transgender people, and also responsible for whatever catastrophes result in the illiberal and potentially violent future we may find ourselves in, one that is already a threat to many.
They are responsible for people being dehumanized, scapegoated, and losing their rights, and anything else that results from this.
Fuck you, too New York Times. Fuck you, too.
That NYT article is a load of crap for so many reasons. Consider - their 3 nominally conservative staff writers in French/Douthat/Brooks were not Trumpy enough, so they had to bring in 2 extra ringers; if we accept that the other 4 are all left (Dubious since Kristoff is def a centrist for example) that's still them working to weight things more heavily on the 'conservative' side.
Aka "We didnt have any MAGA cultists so we brought two in."
And the MAGA idiots were the ones rating our issues as /more/ important, so if the RA RA GO NAZIS writers are removed we are even less important!
And theeeen I look at the photos and what do I see? All but one face is white. Tressie Mcmillan Cottom, the lone black woman, consistently has the actual good opinions.
So glad I ain't giving that rag shit for money; that instead goes to you & other actual journalists doing real work.
What is the reason given for barring any trans girl or woman from competing in women's supports. Apparently they "are" taller and stronger. Suddenly SKILL is no longer a criteria that sports needs to care about. Also, in late grade school, lots of girls are actually taller and stronger than boys. Should they be REQUIRED to play only on boys' teams?
I can see that it might be unfair to have SOME trans women barred from women's teams. Sometimes taller and stronger is indeed unfair. But as a blanket rule? In all instances? Should we bar tall, strong cis women from women's sports?
This all has little to do with sports. It has everything to do with scapegoating, with stereotyping, with finding a minority it is "moral" to hate. Funny thing--that is the way the Nazis portrayed the Jews: it was a moral PLUS to hate them.
Never thought I'd utter the words "this chart makes me want to throw up," but here we are.
It will be such a positive impact for this rag of legacy media to finally go under, and I imagine hardly any worthwhile lives will be materially affected for it. Let collaborating propagandists have the fates they deserve.
That might be the dumbest fucking chart I've ever seen.