Last Sunday, 60 Minutes had a segment about trans.
https://www.cbs.com/shows/60_minutes/video/Q3tmFP_EoyZrqeaAD...
It started out as a discussion of anti-trans laws and quickly took a sharp turn into the ease of convincing doctors to start hormone therapy and actual SRS.
The story was a bit of a mishmash in that the anti-trans laws are by and large aimed at minors, while their story centered on over eighteens who had had some sort of surgery and regretted it.
It was Leslie Stahl’s contention that doctors and therapists are afraid to withhold treatment due to aggressive LGBTQ community backlash.
She spoke of people having very little counseling before taking “irreversible” action.
Leslie Stahl did a bit of clean-up on Overtime. https://www.cbsnews.com/video/lesley-stahl-on-her-60-minutes...
Is this original reporting remotely accurate? Has it become too easy?
Jill
Comments
not in the slightest
They are the new breed of walt heyers
Dipshits who refuse to own their actions and blame everyone else for what they chose and pushed for
Did You Ever Have to Make Up Your Mind???
One of the best songs from the sixties. Lovin' Spoonful.
You make a choice. Live with it.
Jill
Angela Rasch (Jill M I)
Accuracy
It isn't even remotely accurate. Over here, we are getting the same crap, and it is actively funded by hate groups like the Alliance Defending Freedom, the Heritage Foundation, Family Values Conference and so on.
The statement from the last was very, very clear, and while it specifically addressed LGBT+ rights, their message also embraced women's rights and racial issues:
"The best way to untangle the alphabet soup of QLGBT... is to pick on the weakest letter, the T". I love the 'powerful lobby' crap, as all of the power, all of the media, all of the influence and money is on the side of the haters. As an example, the Times, which used to be a quality newspaper (ish) by day 144 of this year had already published 223 anti-trans articles.
Organised attacks on trans rights are out of control, but they are merely an entry issue. Scratch a transphobe, find a homophobe, an antisemite, a racist, a religious extremist and a woman-hater. One of our most prominent and revolting anti-trans campaigners has an internet avatar consisting of a Barbie in an SS uniform.
Edited to add "Very little counselling"? An absolute lie. We have just had another suicide of a trans teen over here, and I am working to support the family of a trans teen who is in hospital after a failed attempt. The reason is that it can take the best part of six years just to get a first appointment on the child list, and then they are kicked off and onto the bottom of the adult queue and another six years of waiting.
I Do Believe You're Right
I've been interviewed by the press many times. The editing process can take a well-reasoned discussion and turn it on its head.
One time, the reporter told me someone in his newspaper's office had broken into his computer and provided the elected official I was trying to fry a copy of the article so that he could suggest ways to "edit." He told me this under oath in a deposition so I tend to believe him.
Jill
Angela Rasch (Jill M I)
Life imitating BCTS?
Oddly enough, I described a similar 60 Minutes
segment in my 2018 story 72 Hours; with furries sort of
standing in for the trans community. A transgender mermaid
and her fiance` have turned in for the night, but then...
.
Someone was nudging me.
“WHAT?!” I barked crossly.
“60 MINUTES,” he said, “It's about GLOO!”
“Oh for fuck's sake! Now?!” I whined, but knew I had to wake up and watch this. I slapped a pillow against the headboard and scooted up against it, elevating my head just enough to see the screen.
The segment was called GLOO! NATION. A female reporter stood outside a convention center in the Akron Ohio who's big animated scoreboard said FURCON 2018 and WELCOME FURRIES! She gave a bit of background about what a furry is, saying: “But there are furries, and then there are furries-”
-before moving inside and showing the throngs of animal costumed attendees. Many mugged and waved and made goofy faces at the camera, but they were only interested in interviewing the few who had used GLOO! to make their fursonas their day-to-day selves, the "furlifers". First a fox---which jarred me fully awake before I realized it wasn't my friend Rae---and then a pair of self described GLOO! Girls, a lithe 19-year-old cheetah and her somewhat chunkier and more butch looking little Armadillo girlfriend, with bonelike armor covering most of her body and continuing up over her head and the bridge of her nose like Batman's cowl.
Both were adorable in their way but I wished the show had picked someone brighter to represent 'GLOO! Nation'. Which of course they wouldn't; since that wouldn't fit the increasingly anti-GLOO! slant of the piece...
The animal girls assured the obviously aghast correspondent that no, their costumes could never come off, and no they weren't going to regret their choice in ten or twenty years. Because sure it might be kinda hard to like find jobs and stuff at first, but this wasn't a problem since within five or ten years furries will have taken over the world. The interview concluded with both girls raising clenched fists and cheering: “GLOO POWER!”
Lesley Stahl paid a visit to the hot pink + zebra stripe Hollywood condo of those self-discribed superstars the Bunnylove Twins- a pair of 20-something blondes with permanent rabbit's ears who had modified themselves into identical huge-breasted Barbie dolls before they each sacrificed an arm part of a leg and GLOOd themselves together into the world's first artificial conjoined twins. Bunny and Lovie Bunnylove couldn't articulate why they had done this to themselves---they didn't seem to understand the question---but this became obvious as they raved on and on about how fabulously famous they were, and the number of subscribers they had on YouTube. But since they couldn't sing, dance or act I doubted if they would be remembered long once the shock value and novelty wore off. I hoped they got along well, they were gonna be stuck with each other for a long time...
By now if I didn't know several GLOO-heads who were sanely functioning members of society (let's give my friend Bonnie the benefit of the doubt...) I would have exactly the opinion about the GLOO! Movement that this program wanted me to. And now they moved in for the kill: A story about a large man with antlers who looked more like Bullwinkle the Moose than I ever would've thought possible. His name was Hayden Walter and he deeply regretted his decision to moosify himself.
With no way of changing back, he only hoped that his story might serve as a warning about the false promises of trans-speciesism, and that the Church of the Universal Solvent he had founded might help prevent others from making the same mistakes he had. He rattled off some fake sounding statistics about 'transformation regret' and furries committing suicide by turning themselves into roadkill. But he seemed to be doing all right for himself, having become the darling of the right's alarmist fringe...
Finally there was an interview with none other than Dr. Paul Fucking McHugh; who was tying the GLOO! Menace in with his usual anti-transgender tirades: “This is exactly what I said would happen if we started letting people with mental illnesses decide they know what's best for themselves!”
.
But I don't think 60 Minutes has an anti-transgender agenda per se.
What they have is a ratings agenda. And happy trans people
are so 5 years ago...
~hugs, Veronica
Well shit, I guess it really CAN happen here..,
.
Thank you, V.
To pick up on the OP again, I speak on the subject of dog whistles, which serve two purposes, the first of which is a simple 'funny handshake' recognition signal between fellow bigots. Dog whistle examples:
"Safeguarding women and children"--- transphobia
"Jewish lobby"---antisemitism
"Traditional family values"---sexism
"All lives matter"---racism.
"World banking/new world order/billionaire funding"---antsemitiism
"Restoration of religious freedom"---imposition of one religion*
The second purpose of the dog whistle is to raise an apparently reasonable "issue", which people not in the loop, either as bigots or their targets, fail to spot as a trigger. Such comments often start with a phrase such as "Is it right that..." and are followed by a completely made-up issue ,That gets the bigotry front and centre in the media.
*Without even a hint of recognising their self-contradiction, a group of prominent religious bigots complained about a number of online banks refusing to process their payments. The Zealots, who campaign for the right of a business to refuse to do business with LGBT+ people because of 'religious freedom' complained about card companies taking the same action. It is a right, in their view, for them to refuse to do business with people because of their religion, but other people have to be denied that right, because of their religion. In both case, "their religion" means that of the bigots, as THAT is what they mean by 'religious freedom'---freedom for theirs, and theirs alone.
Admit It, Laika
You've become unstuck in time.
Jill
Angela Rasch (Jill M I)