• pachrist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    I have a son that loves ballet. He’s 3 and loves to dance. I could beat him, because ballet is arbitrarily "girly, " or I could encourage him to do things he loves.

    I am much more interested in him being a kind, well-rounded person than I am interested in him being someone else’s stereotype of a man.

    I kind of still dislike some of the even more nuanced discussion around gender because it’s goal can still be to categorize. More precisely, but still occasionally hurtful. I would love for everyone to be happy as they are, undefined by anyone but themselves. I’ve known people who came through so many awful experiences, and some found comfort in the group acceptance of a new gender definition, but the ones I know who are happiest eventually shrug that off entirely and find full self-acceptance. It’s so hard to do, and not everyone can, but gender acceptance is only a stepping stone in the path to self-acceptance.

  • Okokimup@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    I also liked (paraphrasing): “Can you think of any other candidates capable of beating trump?” Joe: “Yeah, at least 50 of them.”

  • norimee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Since gender is a social construct, I’d say there are as many as we as a society construct. And if you grow up tomorrow and feel like you, as a part of this society doesn’t see yourself in the ones we already constructed, you just construct a new one.

    So I’d sa, how many genders there are is fluid. But absolutely AT LEAST 3.

  • Furbag@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Off the top of my head - male, female and nonbinary meet the criteria of “at least three” and are probably the most well known. But I imagine a straightforward answer like that would not have satisfied some right wing mouthpiece and they would then intentionally try to conflate sex with gender to make Biden look bad when they take it out of context on the evening news (not that proper context would have mattered to the people watching it anyway).

  • meep_launcher@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    I think it is fair to judge Biden by his record more than his accute gaffs. He’s old af, so on a minute to minute basis, he’s unable to keep a coherent thought. But if you look at what he does in a more macro sense, his administration has been brilliant. It’s the entire “I’m smart in my head but I can’t fully articulate it” situation. Basically he has solid philosophy, he just can’t sell it anymore.

    Frankly, if Biden didn’t have to go into the public, he would be a great president for the next 4 years (with the support he has). Harris will be sharper in public, and I think she will take the Biden positions one step further.

    Ultimately to win elections, Democrats need to be better story tellers. They keep pulling up statistics and data, but they need to create a more visceral message. The GOP fear monger with stories of “an immigrant invasion”, but Dems have yet to create a blockbuster “women dying of lack of abortion access” story. I mean those stories are out there, they just need better messengers.

    • primrosepathspeedrun@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I might even buy that, if there wasn’t a really good case for calling him ‘genocide joe’.

      also, they need to start treating fascists like they treat the left. you know, if they want to win elections. I bet they could even win some votes FROM the left, if they made some compromises.