Well, I see things distinctly different and I need a little detour to explain my position, please bear with me.

I think HylianSwordsmen has a somewhat good definition of the classic left-right scheme. The french aristocracy where back then the one who had power and wealth, and so if you translate it into modern term the right-wing wants to keep the current distribution of power and wealth to a minority, while the left fights to redistribute power and wealth more to the less privileged majority, so that these at least have a base to live a decent life.

Therefore this whole bathroom issue is a typical right-wing-discussion. Whatever you decide, it will not question the current distribution of power and wealth. It will not make the life better for a majority or even a somewhat big minority. Even the life of people directly involved (trans-community for instance) is only marginally affected by the result of this discussion. After all it is not a life-death-situation or even something borderline affecting your life in a bigger scale. Therefore it is a safe discussion for right-wingers to have.

Now different factions of right-wingers take different positions. They just assume a classical binary distinction in bathrooms (we never heard about unisex toilets or similar shenanigans). The different groups of right wingers only differentiate how they make the binary distinction. The classical conservative right-winger wants to make the distinction based on biological sex, while the more modern socially liberal right-winger wants to make the decision based on social gender identity.

The left-wing who wants to improve the live of the majority of people with less power and wealth is quite indifferent to this discussion. It is just not important. At least as long as people are dying because of missing or insufficient health-care, as long as people are homeless, as long as some people get shot by police officers based on the color of their skin, as long as people need more than one job to support a family, as long as people are dying in wars, as long as people are crushed by debts. As long as these problems exist the whole bathroom issue is a discussion for a wealthy privileged elite, who don't want to question the current system of power and wealth distribution.

Especially since we could just do away with the binary distinction altogether.

I completely agree with your post. I just feel both discussions are important and that we can work on multiple problems for multiple groups at the same time and shouldn't limit ourselves. Improving the lives of everybody, a more perfect union, should be what we're striving for. Also all gender restrooms should be everywhere lol

Anyways that doesn't run counter to my point on terfs. Their rhetoric can put trans lives in danger.

Okay, I was just going to let your earlier remarks go because I just didn't feel like getting further off course with this convo (which is supposed to be about the Democratic primary contest) another time, but you know what, something needs to be said at this point.

According to your profile, you are male. Radical feminists broadly, myself included, don't feel that men have the right to proclaim themselves feminists as you have done on this thread. Feminism is about the liberation of women from patriarchal conditions and other forms of male social dominance. For men to just proclaim themselves feminists is hence for men to reserve unto themselves the right to dictate unto women what our rights and interests are, which is...precisely the principle that the feminist movement exists to eradicate from society! Feminism, as far as I'm concerned, is for women. Men can be allied supporters of the women's movement, but that is not the same thing as reserving unto one's self the right to define our movement for us. That in the first place.

In the second place, I am a lesbian rape survivor and I'm NOT going to stand for being compared to Hitler or to slave traders for not feeling comfortable being ass-naked in the same room as men (or "male-bodied persons" if you prefer) I don't know! You're hardly the first person (or even the first or second member of this message board) to make that sort of highly disingenuous and incendiary comparison, so let me point something out to you real quick: lesbians, under the Nazis, were sent to the camps for being lesbians. It's not an impersonal comparison.

Third, the accepted terms for radical feminist views on gender identity are "gender critical" or "gender abolitionist". No one calls themselves "trans-exclusionary" or a "terf" except in sarcasm because these latter terms incorrectly imply that our views are motivated by contempt for trans-identified people, as though we harbor ill will for such persons. No. We are against gender as an idea and are of the view that it is harmful to many, many people, including trans-identified people themselves. Speaking for myself, I believe that trans-identified people should be protected under laws prohibiting hate crimes, that they should be permitted to serve in the military and all of that. Radical feminist views are NOT the same as those of the Christian conservatives in this area.

Finally, let me just come back to this "Nazi" shit. In another post, you proclaimed that "rhetoric can put trans lives in danger" and above you say that there "shouldn't be any debate" about the politics of gender and gender identity. This pro-censorship mentality that equates differences of opinion to murder and insists on just shutting down all debate on the question of gender and gender identity and simply proclaiming one argument the winner by virtue of existing is one that smacks of some authoritarianism to me, personally. I feel that when people oppose the very existence of debate, it's because they know they can't win the argument. I accordingly tire of seeing stories like this in the news.

First off I'm not a straight cis male, so let's just get that clear, I'm trans, so fuck yeah I'm gonna be vocal about this. (btw we should have trans as an option for our profiles js)

Secondly, "being compared to hitler" if you disagree with me that's fine but don't twist my words around, it's in poor taste and doesn't lend to an honest debate. I never compared you to hitler or a slave trader.  That whole paragraph wasn't even about you or gender or feminism. I was making a point about how some things are just black and white, which was a whole separate part of that conversation about the increasing polarization of ideas and opinions that leave no room for nuance in this day and age. Nazism is terrible plain and simple, that was the point I was making. Nothing to do with you. Just the ideology. And I also said that there shouldn't be any debate on condemning those hateful dangerous ideologies, not about gender politics, again you twist my words around. Which, again, that was a separate part of that conversation.

Thirdly, I'm a survivor as well and in case you didn't know queer Jewish individuals such like myself were killed by nazis so idk where you were going with that.

In addition to the bolded, feminism is also about the equal treatment and equal opportunity of the sexes/genders and to defy and challenge the social construct of gender and gender norms.

I get where you're coming from but by being for that bill you're effectively being "trans-exclusionary" , you're discriminating against/excluding an individual solely based on gender/sex, which is literally against what feminism is about. That's what I have an issue with and that's what I think is so problematic.

The part that I vehemently disagree with is your idea that individuals shouldn't be allowed to be called or identify as feminists based solely on their gender/sex, that in and of itself is toxic and seems authoritarian. I know some cis males that constantly and consistently fight for feminist causes and women's rights more than some women I know and I'm proud to call them feminists alongside my sisters. There should be no gatekeepers that discriminate against someone's gender/sex in feminism, it's hypocritical. But it's understandable that I disagree with you on this because you self-identify as a radical feminist, which by definition means you're on the fringe with some feminist ideas, this being one of them.

Edit: Sorry didn't catch the italicized portion my first read through, it seems you may just be transphobic with that comment. Referring to transwomen as men... Wow. But I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and think it was just poor wording and not what you meant.

Debate lineup for tonight and tomorrow in case anyone missed it or forgot.

Debate livestream. https://www.cnn.com/specials/live-video-0

Amy and Warren are wearing the same outfit.

This feels like a tug of war between progressives and moderates.

Omg Warren and Sanders though, they are not backing down and putting up a fight. I love it. The corporate and business loving candidates are showing their colors.

I liked Pete's healthcare plan. Free for everyone but you can keep your private insurance if you want. I also like Pete's immigration plan.