Navigating gender dysphoria? Be heard and be counted in the science.
Join our confidential, cross-country study of 18-25 year olds to tell your story, challenge preconceptions, and have YOUR experience reflected in the science on queer youth | ayagdos.org
IF YOU SEE THIS DO NOT TAKE THIS SURVEY. THIS IS A BAD FAITH STUDY TARGETING TRANS YOUNG PEOPLE FROM SOME OF THE LEADING MINDS OF THE ANTI TRANS MOVEMENT. DO NOT TAKE AT ALL.
Alright now that it’s not the middle of the night let me add some more context: All leading researchers of this study—J. Michael Bailey of Northwestern University, Lisa Littman, and Kenneth Zucker—have longstanding professional associations with research frameworks that challenge or reject gender-affirming models of care. Many trans-led organizations, advocates, and researchers are urging families NOT to participate in this study, as the data collected will be skewed to promote false and harmful narratives about trans people, and will be weaponized by lawmakers looking to pass discriminatory bills.
(Information above from PFLAG National)
Bailey has spent the last 20+ years of his professional career attacking the Trans community — he has been accused of misconduct MULTIPLE times around not getting informed consent for the research he does.
PLEASE SPREAD THE WORD THEY ARE BLAZING THEIR POST TRYING TO REACH THE QUEER COMMUNITY ON TUMBLR.
I love that four different people on my feed scheduled this joyous person to reblog by 8am on June 1. I look forward to seeing this a dozen more times today.
I'm not gonna articulate this well, but there's this phenomenon I keep seeing on the left that I'll call "bean soup rhetoric," wherein someone fails to understand that they are not the target audience for a particular message, or just can't conceptualize why a speaker would craft their message differently to resonate with a target audience that doesn't already completely agree with them.
"The 'God Made Trans People' billboard is stupid! God didn't make me! I'm an atheist!" Okay. The billboard sits along a major highway in Kansas. We can deduce that the target audience is not you—it's the centrist evangelical Christians driving along that road who could probably be persuaded to become allies as long as we choose our words carefully and don't make them feel attacked for not already knowing everything about trans rights issues. Another one I see a lot is, "We shouldn't be talking about how right-wing legislation catches [privileged in-group] in the crossfire when [marginalized out-group] suffers far more!" I know. I agree with you. Which is why you and I are not the intended audience of this argument!
The entire point of rhetoric is to win over someone who doesn't already fully agree with you. In this case, let's say that someone is Jennifer, the moderate center-right mom in your neighborhood who doesn't really know or care about transgender issues but would be absolutely horrified by the idea of her teenage daughter having to submit to an invasive inspection of her body just to be allowed to play soccer. Tell her, "Banning trans students from sports will inevitably subject all student athletes to invasive gender-policing," or "Legal restrictions on gender-affirming care will make it harder for you to access the hormone replacement therapy you take to treat menopause symptoms," and she is more likely to question her existing beliefs and listen to the rest of what you have to say than if you lead with leftist talking points that she already has a calcified opinion about or which she thinks do not personally affect her.
Tailoring the argument to the things she already cares about does not mean we're forgetting that she has more privilege than most—entirely the opposite, in fact. A privileged ally can be extremely valuable. Jennifer votes in every election. And so do all the other ladies at her book club, and church, and in the PTA, and those folks listen to Jennifer. There's a reason both parties were courting suburban women so hard in the last election cycle! If we can find common ground with her on this, if we can get her calling her representatives and talking to her friends and phone-banking and door-knocking and making a stink, that's how the needle starts to move. If I can convince her to take her support away from the candidates who are actively restricting my rights and throw it toward those who want to restore and expand those rights...then I'm sorry, but Jennifer is a more valuable ally to me than the people who agree that the legal boundaries of gender ought to be abolished altogether but refuse to actually do anything except complain online about how both sides are equally bad because the right is trying to force everyone to drink the cyanide kool-aid while the left keeps serving bean soup and they don't like bean soup
Figures show nearly 100 players made less than $50,000 US last season. The highest paid player, Ottawa Charge forward Emily Clark, earned $1
That collective bargaining agreement, which is in place until July 31, 2031, doesn't assign a salary cap to individual PWHL teams, nor is there a maximum salary players can make.
Instead, each team as a whole must meet an average, annual base salary, which increases by three per cent each season — last season, the number to hit was $58,349.50. There is wiggle room of up to 10 per cent due to new signings and player movement, according to the CBA.
Each team in the PWHL is owned by the same entity, The Walter Group, meaning every team has the same resources. The salary figures shed clearer light on how teams are spending that money.
When the league was born, players agreed to some low salaries on the faith of security and support in the league. While the league does cover things like housing assistance, leave, and some other expenses, these salaries are a pittance of what they should be receiving, on the basis that the league simply did not think it would be this profitable, and now that it is, they are stuttering on proper compensation.
The teams NEED to be owned by separate people as the league continues to expand, player salaries need to get much higher, especially as high end sponsors continue to roll in, and merch costs as much or more than what the NHL store charges and constantly sells out.
There is lots of fuss that the NHL is bigger and has more games and has more fans, blah blah, but the LOWEST paid NHL player makes over 700k, and MPP--the highest paid PWHL player, makes 100k. You could double or triple her salary and she would still be 2-3x short of the bottom.
New league this, young league that, the NWSL (US soccer) got paid $2mil collectively to win the world cup the same year the men were paid $9mil to lose in the first elimination round. The women's soccer win more, generate higher merch sales, generate comparable ticket sales and acquire high end sponsors, only to make a fraction of what the men make to lose.
It is an excuse, and an unacceptable one, because there will never be a threshold where the women are allowed to be paid even close to what the men make even when outcompeting them. We shouldn't "wait for the league to grow" when it has grown, now their pay ought to grow with it.
areudirty
andulkaphoto
romaincrisis
annaxmalina
