I don't often hear trans people say cis people literally shouldn't exist. I don't often see them celebrating official public corruption and the destruction of our country. I don't see them deliberately trolling and lying to themselves and the world for the purpose of facilitating hypocrisy and lawbreaking daily.
"Having a flag" is the only common theme they share, any other comparison is a stretch.
I just recently happened to attend a community meeting which took place in a room of a trans-centric housing project. Several of the houses residents also attended. I was schocked to witness a casual chat escalating to a point where several people agreed that they should forcefully storm the parliament building of the capital, if politicians can not be made to fullfil their wishes. So there you have your Jan6 story, from the other side. I decided to distance myself from these people. I know, its just an anecdote, and therefore, according to HN, not worth a dime. But it showed to me that there is really no difference between the sides. If frustrated enough, they end up going for, or at least playing with the thought of, violence. Remember RAF? But I digress...
I've thought about J6 a lot, and what bothers me isn't so much the violence, but the lies and pathetic worldview that drove it.
The idea that violence is necessary if an election is stolen - if political forces actually manipulated the results of the democratic process - is not absurd to me, and is not inherently immoral.
What made J6 wrong was not that it was violent, but that it was based on the obvious lies of a narcissistic compulsive gaslighter with no evidence, so they could further destroy the government and take rights away from people.
I guess my point is, values matter.
---
edit, since I hit the "dang" limit on discussing things with people:
Violence has always been part of societies, when rights are taken away violently by the ruling class or when nonviolent protest fails to secure fundamental rights.
Violence because an election was lost isn't just. Violence because the government is committing genocide is just. Violence because a stupid man told me to go attack the capitol because, against all evidence, he says the election was rigged is wrong. Violence because there is massive evidence of a rigged election (Tanzania, Russia) is not wrong.
Of course, all of this is a distraction from thrust of your argument "MAGA and Trans people are equal because they both have flags and I heard someone say something violent once".
MAGA is more violent, anti-democratic and oppressive than anything you can ever say about any left-wing identity political movement, period.
---
edit2: If one is willing to ignore the history of the world and the conditions I set for when violence seems just (while we diverge from the core discussion around the false equivalence between a gender rights movement and an anti-democracy movement) then I agree, we don't have a lot to talk through.
If you are willing to support--or at least not be bothered by--violence in a democratic process, I guess we can not find any common ground to talk about.
Some commentary added in my prior comment due to HN throttling.
In short, equating a minority group that has a flag and some banter spoken on private, to a massive ongoing movement-in-power in the US to literally destroy the federal government and erode civil liberties... Is a wild take.
This is confusing because transgenderism describes a psychological reality - you are born trans or not, the same as if you're born straight or not - whereas cult membership or political ideology aren't inherent, unchangeable parts of your self.
How are you managing to compare these unrelated things?
Evidence shows that it is not as inherent and built-in from birth as many people think, but is better characterised as a self-belief that can change over time.
Detransitioners are probably the best-known example. There are others, like males with autogynephilia who eventually end up believing they are women, sometimes even in middle-age or later. Also, there are medical case reports about transsexuals with dementia forgetting they identify as the opposite sex, and being shocked and horrified at what has been done to their body. As well as that, there are the "gender-fluid" people whose identity fluctuates rapidly rather than being fixed.
> Evidence shows that it is not as inherent and built-in from birth as many people think, but is better characterised as a self-belief that can change over time.
I have a lot of evidence in front of me that shows the opposite. What are you reading to lead you to the opposite conclusion?
> Detransitioners are probably the best-known example.
Transgenderism is incredibly rare in populations: .1% to .6% of the population. Of that, detransitioners are also incredibly rare: about 1%, and it's not clear yet what percentage of those stop taking puberty blockers or hormones because of financial reasons. Doesn't exactly make the case...
> As well as that, there are the "gender-fluid" people whose identity fluctuates rapidly rather than being fixed.
Correct, because gender is indeed a spectrum. Again that just seems to be making my case for me...
